On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 6:28 AM Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:15 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 29 May 2024 11:16:30 +0100,
> > Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 12:03 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 06:15:52 +0100,
> > > > Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 10:11 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Commit d976c6f4b32c ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for
> > > > > > interrupt-map property") tried to do what it says on the tin,
> > > > > > but failed on a couple of points:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - it confuses bytes and cells. Not a huge deal, except when it
> > > > > > comes to pointer arithmetic
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - it doesn't really handle anything but interrupt-maps that have
> > > > > > their parent #address-cells set to 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The combinations of the two leads to some serious fun on my M1
> > > > > > box, with plenty of WARN-ON() firing all over the shop, and
> > > > > > amusing values being generated for interrupt specifiers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Address both issues so that I can boot my machines again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fixes: d976c6f4b32c ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for interrupt-map property")
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the fix patch but unfortunately it breaks for RISC-V.
> > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > drivers/of/property.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
> > > > > > index 1c83e68f805b..9adebc63bea9 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> > > > > > @@ -1322,7 +1322,13 @@ static struct device_node *parse_interrupt_map(struct device_node *np,
> > > > > > addrcells = of_bus_n_addr_cells(np);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > imap = of_get_property(np, "interrupt-map", &imaplen);
> > > > > > - if (!imap || imaplen <= (addrcells + intcells))
> > > > > > + imaplen /= sizeof(*imap);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + /*
> > > > > > + * Check that we have enough runway for the child unit interrupt
> > > > > > + * specifier and a phandle. That's the bare minimum we can expect.
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > + if (!imap || imaplen <= (addrcells + intcells + 1))
> > > > > > return NULL;
> > > > > > imap_end = imap + imaplen;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1346,8 +1352,14 @@ static struct device_node *parse_interrupt_map(struct device_node *np,
> > > > > > if (!index)
> > > > > > return sup_args.np;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - of_node_put(sup_args.np);
> > > > > > + /*
> > > > > > + * Account for the full parent unit interrupt specifier
> > > > > > + * (address cells, interrupt cells, and phandle).
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > + imap += of_bus_n_addr_cells(sup_args.np);
> > > > >
> > > > > This breaks for RISC-V because we don't have "#address-cells"
> > > > > property in interrupt controller DT node and of_bus_n_addr_cells()
> > > > > retrieves "#address-cells" from the parent of interrupt controller.
> > > >
> > > > That's a feature, not a bug. #address-cells, AFAICT, applies to all
> > > > child nodes until you set it otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The of_irq_parse_raw() looks for "#address-cells" property
> > > > > in the interrupt controller DT node only so we should do a
> > > > > similar thing here as well.
> > > >
> > > > This looks more like a of_irq_parse_raw() bug than anything else.
> > >
> > > If we change of_irq_parse_raw() to use of_bus_n_addr_cells()
> > > then it would still break for RISC-V.
> >
> > I'm not trying to "fix" riscv. I'm merely outlining that you are
> > relying on both broken DTs and a buggy OS.
> >
> > >
> > > Using of_bus_n_addr_cells() over here forces interrupt controller
> > > DT nodes to have a "#address-cells" DT property. There are many
> > > interrupt controller (e.g. RISC-V PLIC or RISC-V APLIC) where the
> > > DT bindings don't require "#address-cells" DT property and existing
> > > DTS files with such interrupt controllers don't have it either.
> >
> > It forces you to set #address-cells *if you rely on a different
> > value in a child node*. It's not like the semantics are new.
>
> We don't have child nodes under the interrupt controller DT node
> (for both RISC-V PLIC and APLIC) so we certainly don't require the
> "#address-cells" property in the interrupt controller DT node.
interrupt controller nodes which are referred to by interrupt-map
require #address-cells. Period. Child nodes or not.
Really, it should be just interrupt-controller nodes require
#address-cells, but that spewed too many warnings so it's limited to
where it is really needed.
Rob
