lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mhi: use irq_flags if client driver configures it
On 2020-12-10 03:48, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 12/9/2020 11:34 AM, Hemant Kumar wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/7/20 7:55 PM, Carl Huang wrote:
>>> If client driver has specified the irq_flags, mhi uses this specified
>>> irq_flags. Otherwise, mhi uses default irq_flags.
>>>
>>> The purpose of this change is to support one MSI vector for QCA6390.
>>> MHI will use one same MSI vector too in this scenario.
>>>
>>> In case of one MSI vector, IRQ_NO_BALANCING is needed when irq
>>> handler
>>> is requested. The reason is if irq migration happens, the msi_data
>>> may
>>> change too. However, the msi_data is already programmed to QCA6390
>>> hardware during initialization phase. This msi_data inconsistence
>>> will
>>> result in crash in kernel.
>
> I'm confused as to how this happens.
>
Host needs to program msi_data to QCA6390 hardware components(lots of
standard
rings), and this msi_data is used to generate MSI interrupt. If kernel
has
re-assigned msi_data to QCA6390 when irq migration happens, and this
re-assigned
msi_data is written to QCA6390 PCIe config space only, standard rings
still use
previous msi_data.


>>>
>>> Another issue is in case of one MSI vector, IRQF_NO_SUSPEND will
>>> trigger
>>> WARNINGS because QCA6390 wants to disable the IRQ during the suspend.
>>>
>>> To avoid above two issues, QCA6390 driver specifies the irq_flags in
>>> case
>>> of one MSI vector when mhi_register_controller is called.
>
> Surely this change should be in a series where there is a following
> change which updates the QCA6390 driver?
>
Yes. This patch involves MHI module, so send it separately.
There is another patch set for QCA6390 to support one MSI vector.

>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Carl Huang <cjhuang@codeaurora.org>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/bus/mhi/core/init.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>   include/linux/mhi.h         | 1 +
>>>   2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/init.c
>>> b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/init.c
>>> index 0ffdebd..5f74e1e 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/init.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/init.c
>>> @@ -148,12 +148,17 @@ int mhi_init_irq_setup(struct mhi_controller
>>> *mhi_cntrl)
>>>   {
>>>       struct mhi_event *mhi_event = mhi_cntrl->mhi_event;
>>>       struct device *dev = &mhi_cntrl->mhi_dev->dev;
>>> +    unsigned long irq_flags = IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_NO_SUSPEND;
>>>       int i, ret;
>>> +    /* if client driver has set irq_flags, use it */
>>> +    if (mhi_cntrl->irq_flags)
>>> +        irq_flags = mhi_cntrl->irq_flags;
>> Jeff if i remember correctly your use case also have one dedicated irq
>> line for all the MSIs, just want to confirm if you are fine with this
>> change ? i was wondering if any input check is required for irq_flags
>> passed by controller, or responsibility is on controller for any
>> undesired behavior. Like passing IRQF_SHARED and IRQF_ONESHOT when one
>> irq line is shared among multiple MSIs.
>
> This feels a bit weird to me, but I don't think it'll cause a problem.
>
> If we are allowing the controller to specify flags, should they be in
> a per irq manner?
>
Not sure if per irq manner is needed for others, but ath11k doesn't need
per irq manner.

>>> +
>>>       /* Setup BHI_INTVEC IRQ */
>>>       ret = request_threaded_irq(mhi_cntrl->irq[0],
>>> mhi_intvec_handler,
>>>                      mhi_intvec_threaded_handler,
>>> -                   IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_NO_SUSPEND,
>>> +                   irq_flags,
>>>                      "bhi", mhi_cntrl);
>>>       if (ret)
>>>           return ret;
>>> @@ -171,7 +176,7 @@ int mhi_init_irq_setup(struct mhi_controller
>>> *mhi_cntrl)
>>>           ret = request_irq(mhi_cntrl->irq[mhi_event->irq],
>>>                     mhi_irq_handler,
>>> -                  IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_NO_SUSPEND,
>>> +                  irq_flags,
>>>                     "mhi", mhi_event);
>>>           if (ret) {
>>>               dev_err(dev, "Error requesting irq:%d for ev:%d\n",
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mhi.h b/include/linux/mhi.h
>>> index d4841e5..f039e58 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/mhi.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/mhi.h
>>> @@ -442,6 +442,7 @@ struct mhi_controller {
>>>       bool fbc_download;
>>>       bool pre_init;
>>>       bool wake_set;
>>> +    unsigned long irq_flags;
>
> You don't document this. That gets a NACK from me.
>
Yes, will document this field in V2.

>>>   };
>>>   /**
>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hemant
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-23 04:32    [W:0.044 / U:0.944 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site