On 09/04/16 12:03, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:19:09 +0000
> Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> The firmware parameter that contains the IRQ sense bits may also contain
>> other data. When return the IRQ type, bits outside of these sense bits
>> should be masked. If these bits are not masked and
>> irq_create_fwspec_mapping() is called to map an IRQ, then the comparison
>> of the type returned from irq_domain_translate() will never match
>> that returned by irq_get_trigger_type() (because this function masks the
>> none sense bits) and so we will always call irq_set_irq_type() to program
>> the type even if it was not really necessary.
>>
>> Currently, the downside to this is unnecessarily re-programmming the type
>> but nevertheless this should be avoided.
>>
>> The Tegra LIC, TI Crossbar and GIC-V3 irqchips all have client instances
>> (from reviewing the device-tree sources) where bits outside the IRQ sense
>> bits are set, but do not mask these bits. Therefore, ensure these bits
>> are masked for these irqchips.
>
> For GICv3, this shouldn't be the case. The DT clearly says that the 3rd
> field should only contain the trigger description. It looks like people
> have been copying their GICv2 DT and simply slapped the v3 description
> in the middle, without changing their interrupt specifiers. Duh.
Hmmm ... I was just double checking on this for the gic-v3 by wading
through the DTS files, and may be there is no issue here. However,
looking at the current code it is a bit inconsistent between firmware
types ...
static int gic_irq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *d,
struct irq_fwspec *fwspec,
unsigned long *hwirq,
unsigned int *type)
{
if (is_of_node(fwspec->fwnode)) {
if (fwspec->param_count < 3)
return -EINVAL;
switch (fwspec->param[0]) {
case 0: /* SPI */
*hwirq = fwspec->param[1] + 32;
break;
case 1: /* PPI */
*hwirq = fwspec->param[1] + 16;
break;
case GIC_IRQ_TYPE_LPI: /* LPI */
*hwirq = fwspec->param[1];
break;
default:
return -EINVAL;
}
*type = fwspec->param[2] & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
return 0;
}
if (is_fwnode_irqchip(fwspec->fwnode)) {
if(fwspec->param_count != 2)
return -EINVAL;
*hwirq = fwspec->param[0];
*type = fwspec->param[1];
return 0;
}
return -EINVAL;
> I guess this patch doesn't hurt though.
Yes, it doesn't but I think I will leave this alone for now, given that
I can't find a case where this would be a problem.
Cheers
Jon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
