Hi,
On 2/14/22 4:17 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 05:13:17 +0000,
> Samuel Holland <samuel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Some OF irqchips, such as the RISC-V PLIC, use interrupts-extended to
>> specify their parent domain(s). That binding does not allow using the
>> interrupt-parent property in the irqchip node, which prevents
>> of_irq_init from properly detecting the irqchip hierarchy.
>
> Is this because there is more than a single interrupt parent?
If you're asking why the PLIC binding specifies interrupts-extended, yes, that's
because there is a separate RISC-V INTC instance for each CPU, so the PLIC has
as many parent domains as there are CPUs.
>> If no interrupt-parent property is present in the enclosing bus or root
>> node, then desc->interrupt_parent will be NULL for both the per-CPU
>> RISC-V INTCs (the actual root domains) and the RISC-V PLIC. Similarly,
>> if the bus or root node specifies `interrupt-parent = <&plic>`, then
>> of_irq_init will hit the `desc->interrupt_parent == np` check, and again
>> all parents will be NULL. So things happen to work today for some boards
>> due to Makefile ordering.
>>
>> However, things break when another irqchip ("foo") is stacked on top of
>> the PLIC. The bus/root node will have `interrupt-parent = <&foo>`,
>> since that is what all of the other peripherals need. When of_irq_init
>> runs, it will try to find the PLIC's parent domain. But because
>> of_irq_find_parent ignores interrupts-extended, it will fall back to
>> using the interrupt-parent property of the PLIC's parent node (i.e. the
>> bus or root node), and see "foo" as the PLIC's parent domain. But this
>> is wrong, because "foo" is actually the PLIC's child domain!
>
> Let me see if I parsed this correctly. You have:
>
> int-parent int-extended
> foo -----------> PLIC --------------> root-irqchip
>
> Is that correct?
Yes.
>>
>> So of_irq_init wrongly attempts to init the stacked irqchip before the
>> PLIC. This fails and breaks boot.
>>
>> Fix this by having of_irq_find_parent return the first node referenced
>> by interrupts-extended when that property is present. Even if the
>> property references multiple different IRQ domains, this will still work
>> reliably in of_irq_init as long as all referenced domains are the same
>> distance away from some root domain (e.g. the RISC-V INTCs referenced by
>> the PLIC's interrupts-extended are always all root domains).
>
> I'm a bit worried that the distance assumption may not always hold.
> Maybe it isn't something we need to deal with right now, but a comment
> wouldn't hurt to make this assumption clear.
OK, I will add a comment to v2.
Regards,
Samuel
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> drivers/of/irq.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/irq.c b/drivers/of/irq.c
>> index 2b07677a386b..0c20e22b91f5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/irq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/irq.c
>> @@ -60,7 +60,8 @@ struct device_node *of_irq_find_parent(struct device_node *child)
>> return NULL;
>>
>> do {
>> - if (of_property_read_u32(child, "interrupt-parent", &parent)) {
>> + if (of_property_read_u32(child, "interrupt-parent", &parent) &&
>> + of_property_read_u32(child, "interrupts-extended", &parent)) {
>> p = of_get_parent(child);
>> } else {
>> if (of_irq_workarounds & OF_IMAP_NO_PHANDLE)
>
> With the comment added:
>
> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> M.
>
