> > There are 10 interrupt sources of soc0_intc in CPU die INTC.
> > 1. 6 interrupt sources in IO die of soc1_intc0~soc1_intc5.
> > 2. 2 interrupt sources in LTPI of ltpi0_intc0 and ltpi0_intc1.
> > 3. 2 interrupt sources in LTPI of ltpi1_intc0 and ltpi1_intc1.
> > Request GIC interrupt to check each bit in status register to do next
> > level INTC handler.
> >
> > In next level INTC handler of IO die or LTPI INTC using soc1_intcX
> > combining
> > 32 interrupt sources into soc0_intc11 in CPU die. In soc1_intcX,
> > handler would check 32 bit of status register to do the requested
> > device handler.
>
> I can't figure out what this word salad is trying to tell me. Nothing in the code
> does any combining. The handler reads the very same INTC_INT_STATUS_REG.
According to AST2700 datasheet, there are two kinds of interrupt controller with enable and raw status registers for use.
1. INTC0 is used to assert GIC(#192~#197) if interrupt in INTC1 asserted. There are 6 GIC interrupt number(#192~#197) used in one INTC0.
2. INTC1 is used to assert INTC0 if interrupt of modules asserted. There are 32 module interrupts used in one INTC1.
+------+ +---------+ +-----------+ ---module0
| GIC | -----|INTC0 | ---+----| INTC1_0|---module2...
+------+ +---------+ | +-----------+---module31
|
| +-----------+---module0
+-----| INTC1_0|---module2...
| +-----------+---module31
...
| +-----------+---module0
+-----| INTC1_5|---module2...
| +-----------+---module31
>
> >
>
> This lacks a Signed-off-by: tag. See Documentation/process/
>
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-aspeed-intc.c | 198
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > +
> > +#define INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG 0x00
> > +#define INTC_INT_STATUS_REG 0x04
> > +
> > +struct aspeed_intc_ic {
> > + void __iomem *base;
> > + raw_spinlock_t gic_lock;
> > + raw_spinlock_t intc_lock;
> > + struct irq_domain *irq_domain;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static void aspeed_intc_ic_irq_handler(struct irq_desc *desc) {
> > + struct aspeed_intc_ic *intc_ic = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
> > + struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
> > + unsigned long bit, status, flags;
> > +
> > + chained_irq_enter(chip, desc);
> > +
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&intc_ic->gic_lock, flags);
>
> There is no point for irqsave(). This code is invoked with interrupts disabled and
> please convert to:
>
> scoped_guard(raw_spinlock, &intc_ic->gic_lock) {
Agree.
>
> > + status = readl(intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_STATUS_REG);
> > + for_each_set_bit(bit, &status, 32) {
>
> Please use a define and not a hardcoded number.
Agree.
>
> > + generic_handle_domain_irq(intc_ic->irq_domain, bit);
> > + writel(BIT(bit), intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_STATUS_REG);
> > + }
>
> }
>
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intc_ic->gic_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + chained_irq_exit(chip, desc);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void aspeed_intc_irq_mask(struct irq_data *data) {
> > + struct aspeed_intc_ic *intc_ic = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> > + unsigned int mask = readl(intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG) &
> ~BIT(data->hwirq);
> > + unsigned long flags;
>
> Invoked with interrupts disabled too.
Agree.
>
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&intc_ic->intc_lock, flags);
> > + writel(mask, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intc_ic->intc_lock, flags);
>
> guard(raw_spinlock)(&intc_ic->intc_lock);
Agree.
> writel(mask, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG);
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void aspeed_intc_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) {
> > + struct aspeed_intc_ic *intc_ic = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> > + unsigned int unmask = readl(intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG) |
> BIT(data->hwirq);
> > + unsigned long flags;
>
> Ditto.
Agree.
>
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&intc_ic->intc_lock, flags);
> > + writel(unmask, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intc_ic->intc_lock, flags); }
> > +
> > +static int aspeed_intc_irq_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data, const struct
> cpumask *dest,
> > + bool force)
> > +{
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +}
>
> No point for this stub, just leave irq_set_affinity uninitialized. The core code
> checks that pointer for NULL. Aside of that this stub and the assignment would
> need a #ifdef CONFIG_SMP guard.
Agree.
>
> > +static struct irq_chip aspeed_intc_chip = {
> > + .name = "ASPEED INTC",
> > + .irq_mask = aspeed_intc_irq_mask,
> > + .irq_unmask = aspeed_intc_irq_unmask,
> > + .irq_set_affinity = aspeed_intc_irq_set_affinity,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int aspeed_intc_ic_map_irq_domain(struct irq_domain *domain,
> unsigned int irq,
> > + irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
> > +{
> > + irq_set_chip_and_handler(irq, &aspeed_intc_chip, handle_level_irq);
> > + irq_set_chip_data(irq, domain->host_data);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct irq_domain_ops aspeed_intc_ic_irq_domain_ops = {
> > + .map = aspeed_intc_ic_map_irq_domain,
>
> .map = aspeed_intc_ic_map_irq_domain,
Agree.
>
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int __init aspeed_intc_ic_of_init(struct device_node *node,
> > +struct device_node *parent) {
> > + struct aspeed_intc_ic *intc_ic;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > + int irq;
>
> int irq, ret;
Agree.
>
> No point in initializing ret.
Agree.
>
> > + intc_ic = kzalloc(sizeof(*intc_ic), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!intc_ic)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + intc_ic->base = of_iomap(node, 0);
> > + if (!intc_ic->base) {
> > + pr_err("Failed to iomap intc_ic base\n");
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto err_free_ic;
> > + }
> > + writel(0xffffffff, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_STATUS_REG);
> > + writel(0x0, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG);
> > +
> > + irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(node, 0);
> > + if (!irq) {
> > + pr_err("Failed to get irq number\n");
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto err_iounmap;
> > + }
> > +
> > + intc_ic->irq_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, 32,
> > + &aspeed_intc_ic_irq_domain_ops, intc_ic);
> > + if (!intc_ic->irq_domain) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto err_iounmap;
> > + }
> > +
> > + raw_spin_lock_init(&intc_ic->gic_lock);
> > + raw_spin_lock_init(&intc_ic->intc_lock);
> > +
> > + intc_ic->irq_domain->name = "aspeed-intc-domain";
>
> See above.
Do you mean the name of "ASPEED INTC" would be covered by "aspeed-intc-doman"?
>
> > + irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(irq,
> > + aspeed_intc_ic_irq_handler, intc_ic);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +err_iounmap:
> > + iounmap(intc_ic->base);
> > +err_free_ic:
> > + kfree(intc_ic);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int __init aspeed_intc_ic_of_init_v2(struct device_node *node,
> > + struct device_node *parent)
> > +{
> > + struct aspeed_intc_ic *intc_ic;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > + int irq, i;
> > +
> > + intc_ic = kzalloc(sizeof(*intc_ic), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!intc_ic)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + intc_ic->base = of_iomap(node, 0);
> > + if (!intc_ic->base) {
> > + pr_err("Failed to iomap intc_ic base\n");
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto err_free_ic;
> > + }
> > + writel(0xffffffff, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_STATUS_REG);
> > + writel(0x0, intc_ic->base + INTC_INT_ENABLE_REG);
> > +
> > + intc_ic->irq_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, 32,
> > + &aspeed_intc_ic_irq_domain_ops, intc_ic);
> > + if (!intc_ic->irq_domain) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto err_iounmap;
> > + }
> > +
> > + raw_spin_lock_init(&intc_ic->gic_lock);
> > + raw_spin_lock_init(&intc_ic->intc_lock);
> > +
> > + intc_ic->irq_domain->name = "aspeed-intc-domain";
>
> So up to this point aspeed_intc_ic_of_init_v2() is a verbatim copy of
> aspeed_intc_ic_of_init(). Why can't you reuse that function? It's not rocket
> science to make that work.
Agree.
>
> > + for (i = 0; i < of_irq_count(node); i++) {
> > + irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(node, i);
> > + if (!irq) {
> > + pr_err("Failed to get irq number\n");
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto err_iounmap;
>
> Assume #0 and #1 succeed. #2 fails and leaves the chained handlers and the
> irqdomain around, but then unmaps the base and frees the data which the
> handler and the domain code needs. Seriously?
So, do you recommend moving check irq out of for loop?
And, irq_set_chained_hanlder_and_data in another for loop?
>
> > + } else {
>
> Pointless else as the if clause terminates with a goto.
Agree. I will remove the else
>
> > + irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(irq,
> aspeed_intc_ic_irq_handler,
> > +intc_ic);
>
> So if I understand the code correctly then the hardware coalesces the pending
> bits into a single status register, but depending on which part of the SoC raised
> the interrupt one of the demultiplex interrupts is raised in the GIC.
Yes.
>
> Any of those demultiplex interrupt handles _all_ pending bits and therefore
> you need gic_lock to serialize them, right?
Yes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Thanks a lot for your review.
