Messages in this thread | | | From | Huacai Chen <> | Date | Wed, 7 Jul 2021 12:57:17 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 7/9] irqchip: Add LoongArch CPU interrupt controller support |
| |
Hi, Marc,
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 9:21 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 06 Jul 2021 04:09:02 +0100, > Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn> wrote: > > > > We are preparing to add new Loongson (based on LoongArch, not MIPS) > > support. This patch add LoongArch CPU interrupt controller support. > > > > Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn> > > --- > > drivers/irqchip/Kconfig | 10 ++++ > > drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 1 + > > drivers/irqchip/irq-loongarch-cpu.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 98 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-loongarch-cpu.c > > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig > > index 084bc4c2eebd..443c3a7a0cc1 100644 > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig > > @@ -528,6 +528,16 @@ config EXYNOS_IRQ_COMBINER > > Say yes here to add support for the IRQ combiner devices embedded > > in Samsung Exynos chips. > > > > +config IRQ_LOONGARCH_CPU > > + bool > > + select GENERIC_IRQ_CHIP > > + select IRQ_DOMAIN > > + select GENERIC_IRQ_EFFECTIVE_AFF_MASK > > + help > > + Support for the LoongArch CPU Interrupt Controller. For details of > > + irq chip hierarchy on LoongArch platforms please read the document > > + Documentation/loongarch/irq-chip-model.rst. > > + > > config LOONGSON_LIOINTC > > bool "Loongson Local I/O Interrupt Controller" > > depends on MACH_LOONGSON64 > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile > > index f88cbf36a9d2..4e34eebe180b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile > > @@ -105,6 +105,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_LS1X_IRQ) += irq-ls1x.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_TI_SCI_INTR_IRQCHIP) += irq-ti-sci-intr.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_TI_SCI_INTA_IRQCHIP) += irq-ti-sci-inta.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_TI_PRUSS_INTC) += irq-pruss-intc.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_IRQ_LOONGARCH_CPU) += irq-loongarch-cpu.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_LOONGSON_LIOINTC) += irq-loongson-liointc.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_LOONGSON_HTPIC) += irq-loongson-htpic.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_LOONGSON_HTVEC) += irq-loongson-htvec.o > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-loongarch-cpu.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-loongarch-cpu.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..918d61a5a980 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-loongarch-cpu.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > +/* > > + * Copyright (C) 2020 Loongson Technologies, Inc. > > + */ > > + > > +#include <linux/init.h> > > +#include <linux/interrupt.h> > > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/irq.h> > > +#include <linux/irqchip.h> > > +#include <linux/irqdomain.h> > > + > > +#include <asm/setup.h> > > +#include <asm/loongarchregs.h> > > + > > +static struct irq_domain *irq_domain; > > + > > +static inline void unmask_loongarch_irq(struct irq_data *d) > > +{ > > + set_csr_ecfg(ECFGF(d->hwirq)); > > +} > > + > > +static inline void mask_loongarch_irq(struct irq_data *d) > > +{ > > + clear_csr_ecfg(ECFGF(d->hwirq)); > > +} > > + > > +#define enable_loongarch_irq unmask_loongarch_irq > > +#define disable_loongarch_irq mask_loongarch_irq > > + > > +static struct irq_chip loongarch_cpu_irq_controller = { > > + .name = "LoongArch", > > + .irq_ack = mask_loongarch_irq, > > + .irq_mask = mask_loongarch_irq, > > + .irq_mask_ack = mask_loongarch_irq, > > + .irq_unmask = unmask_loongarch_irq, > > + .irq_eoi = unmask_loongarch_irq, > > + .irq_enable = enable_loongarch_irq, > > + .irq_disable = disable_loongarch_irq, > > NAK. Clearly, you don't understand what these callbacks do. > > > +}; > > + > > +asmlinkage void __weak plat_irq_dispatch(int irq) > > +{ > > + do_IRQ(irq_linear_revmap(irq_domain, irq)); > > +} > > NAK. If you are going to add a new architecture to Linux, do not mimic > the MIPS brain-damage. Have your new architecture to support multiple > interrupt controllers from day one without the need to add these silly > weak symbols. > > Move the low-level code such as this into the architecture code, and > use the existing domain abstractions. Thanks, I will consider to rework the whole thing.
Huacai > > > + > > +static int loongarch_cpu_intc_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq, > > + irq_hw_number_t hwirq) > > +{ > > + struct irq_chip *chip; > > + > > + chip = &loongarch_cpu_irq_controller; > > + set_vi_handler(EXCCODE_INT_START + hwirq, plat_irq_dispatch); > > + irq_set_chip_and_handler(irq, chip, handle_percpu_irq); > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static const struct irq_domain_ops loongarch_cpu_intc_irq_domain_ops = { > > + .map = loongarch_cpu_intc_map, > > + .xlate = irq_domain_xlate_onecell, > > Are all interrupts with the same trigger? > > > +}; > > + > > + > > +int __init loongarch_cpu_irq_init(struct device_node *of_node, struct device_node *parent) > > +{ > > + int i; > > + > > + /* Mask interrupts. */ > > + clear_csr_ecfg(ECFG0_IM); > > + clear_csr_estat(ESTATF_IP); > > + > > + irq_alloc_descs(-1, LOONGSON_CPU_IRQ_BASE, EXCCODE_INT_NUM, 0); > > + > > + for (i = LOONGSON_CPU_IRQ_BASE; i <= LOONGSON_CPU_LAST_IRQ; i++) > > + irq_set_noprobe(i); > > + > > + irq_domain = irq_domain_add_legacy(of_node, EXCCODE_INT_NUM, > > + LOONGSON_CPU_IRQ_BASE, 0, &loongarch_cpu_intc_irq_domain_ops, NULL); > > Oh, the irony of using irq_domain_add_legacy() for a brand new > architecture... > > > + > > + if (!irq_domain) > > + panic("Failed to add irqdomain for loongarch CPU"); > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(cpu_intc, "loongson,cpu-interrupt-controller", loongarch_cpu_irq_init); > > As it stands, this driver has zero chance of being merged. You > seriously need to move your low-level interrupt handling code into the > 21st century. > > M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
| |