On Mon, 2019-02-11 at 08:50 +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:35:29 +0000,
> Seiya Wang <seiya.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2019-02-07 at 15:52 +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > On 07/02/2019 15:47, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > > On 07/02/2019 15:20, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On 24/01/2019 09:07, Erin Lo wrote:
> > > >>> From: Seiya Wang <seiya.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> To support partitioned PPIs, 4 interrupt parameters should be valid
> > > >>> for sysirq.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Seiya Wang <seiya.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Erin Lo <erin.lo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>> drivers/irqchip/irq-mtk-sysirq.c | 4 ++--
> > > >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mtk-sysirq.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mtk-sysirq.c
> > > >>> index 90aaf19..282736a 100644
> > > >>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mtk-sysirq.c
> > > >>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mtk-sysirq.c
> > > >>> @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ static int mtk_sysirq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *d,
> > > >>> unsigned int *type)
> > > >>> {
> > > >>> if (is_of_node(fwspec->fwnode)) {
> > > >>> - if (fwspec->param_count != 3)
> > > >>> + if (fwspec->param_count != 3 && fwspec->param_count != 4)
> > > >>
> > > >> Where is this 4th parameter used?
> > > >
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.txt#n14
> > > Sorry, I fired Send way too early.
> > >
> > > What I wanted to add is that it is not clear to me why this change would
> > > be required here, as this driver only supports SPIs. It could be fixed
> > > by just relaxing the binding itself.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > M.
> >
> > Do you mean that we should change #interrupt-cells back to 3 for sysirq
> > and remove the 4th parameters of every spi interrupts in mt8183.dtsi
> > (i.e. 3 parameters for spi, 4 for ppi) such that we can discard this
> > patch?
>
> It is more subtle than that:
>
> - PPIs must have the affinity parameter in their int-spec (since you
> need that for the PMU)
>
> - SPIs that are directly routed to the GIC must also have the affinity
> parameter (although set to zero).
>
> - SPIs that are routed via the sysirq block (or any other) can use the
> 3 parameter variant, as they are not resolved in the context of the
> GIC, but in that of the sysirq.
>
> But in short, yes. You should be able to drop this patch altogether.
>
> > If yes, we may need some time to verify the change before resending the
> > patch.
>
> That's absolutely fine.
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
Thanks for the detailed descriptions.
We will remove this patch and resend again.
