Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V15 00/15] irqchip: Add LoongArch-related irqchip drivers | From | Jianmin Lv <> | Date | Mon, 18 Jul 2022 16:29:30 +0800 |
| |
On 2022/7/18 下午2:39, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 02:07:21 +0100, > Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@loongson.cn> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2022/7/17 下午10:49, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 12:29:05 +0100, >>> Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@loongson.cn> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2022/7/17 下午6:02, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>>>> But the other issue is that you seem to call this function from two >>>>> different locations. This cannot be right, as there should be only one >>>>> probe order, and not multiple. >>>>> >>>> >>>> As we described two IRQ models(Legacy and Extended) in this cover >>>> letter, the parent domain of MSI domain can be htvec domain(Legacy) or >>>> eiointc domain(Extended). In MADT, only one APIC(HTPIC for htvec or >>>> EIOPIC for eiointc) is allowed to pass into kernel, and then in the >>>> irqchip driver, only one kind APIC of them can be parsed from MADT, so >>>> we have to support two probe order for them. >>> >>> Do you really have the two variants in the wild? Or is this just >>> because this is a possibility? >>> >> >> Currently, there are not CPUs(used for PC and server) based on >> LoongArch shipped with only HTPIC, but with both HTPIC and EIOPIC, we >> just want to provide two choices for designers(but obviously, EIOPIC >> may be enough currently). Do you think we don't have to do like this, >> yes? If so, maybe we don't have to support ACPI-way entry for htvec >> currently, and do the work in future if required. > > If the existing HW is only following the 'Extended' model, then I'd > suggest you only support this for now. It has two effects: > > - it simplifies the current code, making it more maintainable and > easier to reason about > > - it sends the message to integrators that 'Extended' is the correct > model, and that it is what they should support > > Now, we don't have much time left to get this series into -next (I > will be closing the tree to new features this week, and only queue > fixes). > > So whatever you need to do, please do it quickly so that we can have > at least some of this in 5.20. > > Thanks, > > M. >
Ok, Marc, thanks for your suggestion, got it, I'll remove 'Legacy' mode support and send next version as soon as possible.
|  |