Hi Rafael,
On 14 July 2016 at 04:30, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 7:53 PM, <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> This patch adds support for parsing arch timer in GTDT,
>> provides some kernel APIs to parse all the PPIs and
>> always-on info in GTDT and export them.
>>
>> By this driver, we can simplify arm_arch_timer drivers, and
>> separate the ACPI GTDT knowledge from it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 5 ++
>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig | 15 ++++
>> drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c | 170 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/acpi.h | 6 ++
>> 6 files changed, 198 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> index b7e2e77..1cdc7d2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> @@ -521,4 +521,9 @@ config XPOWER_PMIC_OPREGION
>>
>> endif
>>
>> +if ARM64
>> +source "drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig"
>> +
>> +endif
>> +
>> endif # ACPI
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Makefile b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
>> index 251ce85..1a94ff7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
>> @@ -99,5 +99,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_EXTLOG) += acpi_extlog.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_PMIC_OPREGION) += pmic/intel_pmic.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_CRC_PMIC_OPREGION) += pmic/intel_pmic_crc.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_XPOWER_PMIC_OPREGION) += pmic/intel_pmic_xpower.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM64) += arm64/
>>
>> video-objs += acpi_video.o video_detect.o
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..ff5c253
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
>> +#
>> +# ACPI Configuration for ARM64
>> +#
>> +
>> +menu "The ARM64-specific ACPI Support"
>> +
>> +config ACPI_GTDT
>> + bool "ACPI GTDT table Support"
>
> This should depend on ARM64.
>
> Also I wonder if it needs to be user-selectable? Wouldn't it be
> better to enable it by default when building for ARM64 with ACPI?
>
>> + help
>> + GTDT (Generic Timer Description Table) provides information
>> + for per-processor timers and Platform (memory-mapped) timers
>> + for ARM platforms. Select this option to provide information
>> + needed for the timers init.
>> +
>> +endmenu
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile b/drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..466de6b
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile
>> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_GTDT) += acpi_gtdt.o
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..9ee977d
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
>> +/*
>> + * ARM Specific GTDT table Support
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2016, Linaro Ltd.
>> + * Author: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> + * Fu Wei <fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> + * Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> + *
>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
>> +#include <linux/init.h>
>> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>> +
>> +#include <clocksource/arm_arch_timer.h>
>> +
>> +#undef pr_fmt
>> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "GTDT: " fmt
>
> I would add "ACPI" to the prefix too if I were you, but that's me.
good idea, you are right, will do
>
>> +
>> +typedef struct {
>> + struct acpi_table_gtdt *gtdt;
>> + void *platform_timer_start;
>> + void *gtdt_end;
>> +} acpi_gtdt_desc_t;
>> +
>> +static acpi_gtdt_desc_t acpi_gtdt_desc __initdata;
>> +
>> +static inline void *next_platform_timer(void *platform_timer)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_gtdt_header *gh = platform_timer;
>> +
>> + platform_timer += gh->length;
>> + if (platform_timer < acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt_end)
>> + return platform_timer;
>> +
>> + return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#define for_each_platform_timer(_g) \
>> + for (_g = acpi_gtdt_desc.platform_timer_start; _g; \
>> + _g = next_platform_timer(_g))
>> +
>> +static inline bool is_timer_block(void *platform_timer)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_gtdt_header *gh = platform_timer;
>> +
>> + if (gh->type == ACPI_GTDT_TYPE_TIMER_BLOCK)
>> + return true;
>> +
>> + return false;
>
> This is just too much code. It would suffice to do
>
> return gh->type == ACPI_GTDT_TYPE_TIMER_BLOCK;
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool is_watchdog(void *platform_timer)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_gtdt_header *gh = platform_timer;
>> +
>> + if (gh->type == ACPI_GTDT_TYPE_WATCHDOG)
>> + return true;
>> +
>> + return false;
>
> Just like above.
Thanks, this is better :-) will do
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Get some basic info from GTDT table, and init the global variables above
>> + * for all timers initialization of Generic Timer.
>> + * This function does some validation on GTDT table.
>> + */
>> +static int __init acpi_gtdt_desc_init(struct acpi_table_header *table)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_table_gtdt *gtdt = container_of(table,
>> + struct acpi_table_gtdt,
>> + header);
>> +
>> + acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt = gtdt;
>> + acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt_end = (void *)table + table->length;
>> +
>> + if (table->revision < 2) {
>> + pr_info("Revision:%d doesn't support Platform Timers.\n",
>> + table->revision);
>
> Is it really useful to print this message (and the one below) at the
> "info" level? What about changing them to pr_debug()?
yes, pr_debug is better, thanks :-) will do
>
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (!gtdt->platform_timer_count) {
>> + pr_info("No Platform Timer.\n");
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + acpi_gtdt_desc.platform_timer_start = (void *)gtdt +
>> + gtdt->platform_timer_offset;
>> + if (acpi_gtdt_desc.platform_timer_start <
>> + (void *)table + sizeof(struct acpi_table_gtdt)) {
>> + pr_err(FW_BUG "Platform Timer pointer error.\n");
>
> Why pr_err()?
if (true), that means the GTDT table has bugs.
>
>> + acpi_gtdt_desc.platform_timer_start = NULL;
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return gtdt->platform_timer_count;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int __init map_generic_timer_interrupt(u32 interrupt, u32 flags)
>> +{
>> + int trigger, polarity;
>> +
>> + if (!interrupt)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + trigger = (flags & ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) ? ACPI_EDGE_SENSITIVE
>> + : ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE;
>> +
>> + polarity = (flags & ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY) ? ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW
>> + : ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH;
>> +
>> + return acpi_register_gsi(NULL, interrupt, trigger, polarity);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Map the PPIs of per-cpu arch_timer.
>> + * @type: the type of PPI
>> + * Returns 0 if error.
>> + */
>> +int __init acpi_gtdt_map_ppi(int type)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_table_gtdt *gtdt = acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt;
>> +
>> + switch (type) {
>> + case PHYS_SECURE_PPI:
>> + return map_generic_timer_interrupt(gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt,
>> + gtdt->secure_el1_flags);
>> + case PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI:
>> + return map_generic_timer_interrupt(gtdt->non_secure_el1_interrupt,
>> + gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags);
>> + case VIRT_PPI:
>> + return map_generic_timer_interrupt(gtdt->virtual_timer_interrupt,
>> + gtdt->virtual_timer_flags);
>> +
>> + case HYP_PPI:
>> + return map_generic_timer_interrupt(gtdt->non_secure_el2_interrupt,
>> + gtdt->non_secure_el2_flags);
>> + default:
>> + pr_err("ppi type error.\n");
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * acpi_gtdt_c3stop - got c3stop info from GTDT
>> + *
>> + * Returns 1 if the timer is powered in deep idle state, 0 otherwise.
>> + */
>> +int __init acpi_gtdt_c3stop(void)
>
> Why not bool?
I forget to fix it, sorry, will do.
>
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_table_gtdt *gtdt = acpi_gtdt_desc.gtdt;
>> +
>> + return !(gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags & ACPI_GTDT_ALWAYS_ON);
>> +}
>> +
>> +int __init gtdt_arch_timer_init(struct acpi_table_header *table)
>> +{
>> + if (table)
>> + return acpi_gtdt_desc_init(table);
>> +
>> + pr_err("table pointer error.\n");
>
> This message is totally unuseful.
will delete it acpi_gtdt_desc_init, and move the code to here.
>
>> +
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +}
>
> What is supposed to be calling this function?
at this point, I think I can simplify this code a little bit. Thanks :-)
I will delete one
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
>> index 288fac5..8439579 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
>> @@ -532,6 +532,12 @@ void acpi_walk_dep_device_list(acpi_handle handle);
>> struct platform_device *acpi_create_platform_device(struct acpi_device *);
>> #define ACPI_PTR(_ptr) (_ptr)
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_GTDT
>> +int __init gtdt_arch_timer_init(struct acpi_table_header *table);
>> +int __init acpi_gtdt_map_ppi(int type);
>> +int __init acpi_gtdt_c3stop(void);
>
> The __init thing is not necessary here.
will delete them, thanks
>
>> +#endif
>> +
>> #else /* !CONFIG_ACPI */
>>
>> #define acpi_disabled 1
>> --
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
--
Best regards,
Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
