On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:18:14PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:32:34 +0200 (CEST), Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 31 May 2013, Christian Ruppert wrote:
> >
> > > The SOC interrupt controller driver for the Abilis Systems TB10x series of
> > > SOCs based on ARC700 CPUs.
> > >
> > > This patch depends on commits eb76bdd407d8a90e59a06cb0158886df390e5d1c and
> > > 712bc93df9e7f14b8a163148d2aa7c778e151627 from branch irq/for-arm of
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git.
> >
> > That branch can be pulled into ARC as well. It only contains the
> > changes, which are necessary for the irq domain support of the generic
> > irq chip.
Vineet, what do you think about this? For the moment I have pulled the
patch set into our local branch and to me it doesn't matter, we just
have to make sure to respect this dependency when merging everything
together.
> > > +static void tb10x_irq_cascade(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
> > > +{
> > > + struct irq_domain *domain = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
> > > +
> > > + generic_handle_irq(irq_find_mapping(domain, irq));
> > > +}
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > + for (i = 0; i < nrirqs; i++) {
> > > + unsigned int irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(ictl, i);
> > > +
> > > + irq_set_handler_data(irq, domain);
> > > + irq_set_chained_handler(irq, tb10x_irq_cascade);
> > > + }
> >
> > I might be completely confused, but this does not make any sense at
> > all.
> >
> > You allocate a linear domain and then map the interrupts in the
> > domain. The mapping function retrieves the hardware interrupt number
> > and creates a virtual interrupt number, installs the chip and the
> > handler for the interrupt and finally returns the virtual interrupt
> > number.
> >
> > Now you take that virtual interrupt number and install
> > tb10x_irq_cascade as the handler. irq_set_chained_handler() will
> > startup (unmask) the interrupt right away.
> >
> > In the cascade handler you take the virtual interrupt number, which
> > you get as argument, and find the mapping, i.e. the matching VIRTUAL
> > interrupt number for the VIRTUAL interrupt number and then call the
> > handler.
> >
> > How is this supposed to work?
>
> I think what is going on here is that the tb10x interrupt controller
> appears to be more of a front-end to another interrupt controller with
> each input wired up 1:1 to the interrupt inputs of the other controller.
Exactly. The TB10x interrupt controller is a front-end for the ARC CPU
built-in interrupt controller.
> (I don't know why someone would design an interrupt controller that way,
> but that's another issue).
There are several technical reasons for this front-end. The one that
concerns us most in the kernel is that the TB10x front-end does the
translation from all kinds of interrupt trigger modes to the level
triggered interrupts natively understood by the ARC CPU built-in
controller.
> The loop above is mapping each of the
> interrupt inputs on the parent controller so that each child controller
> can be chained to it as an input. I can't think of how else it could be
> set up with the current code if the drivers were kept separate.
This is exactly the intention. I haven't found an easier way to do this
either but I'm open to suggestions. Btw, I have noticed that the parent
controller interrupts from this loop are not listed in /proc/interrupts.
I'm not sure if what is done in the loop is sufficient or if I should
add something else (the naive option of using request_irq doesn't work,
the kernel saying something in the lines of "irq XX triggered but noone
cares").
> Christian, what is the parent interrupt controller for this SoC? It
> really feels like the tb10x-ictl belongs as part of the parent
> controller. I went and looked at the parent node, and I saw this:
>
> intc: interrupt-controller {
> compatible = "snps,arc700-intc";
> interrupt-controller;
> #interrupt-cells = <1>;
> };
>
> I noticed the conspicuous absence of a reg property. Is this something
> architectural?
The parent controller is part of the CPU itself, see
arch/arc/kernel/irq.c. This controller is maintained by Vineet and IMHO
we should keep it separate from the TB10x one since it is implicitly
used in all ARC-based platforms whereas the TB10x controller is used in
Abilis chips only.
> If I were working on this system I'd drop the
> snps,arc700-intc node entirely and have a single abilis,tb10x-intc that
> encapsulated the properties of both (you would of course want to share
> handler functions for the 'normal' inputs without the custom features).
> That would eliminate the goofyness of listing 27 separate interrupts in
> the abilis,tb10x-ictl interrupts property.
To complicate things even further, some ARC CPU built-in peripherals
(e.g. timers) generate interrupts directly to the ARC built-in interrupt
controller (without going through the TB10x front-end), hence the
"goofy" list of interrupts in the TB10x DT node.
Greetings,
Christian
--
Christian Ruppert , <christian.ruppert@xxxxxxxxxx>
/|
Tel: +41/(0)22 816 19-42 //| 3, Chemin du Pré-Fleuri
_// | bilis Systems CH-1228 Plan-les-Ouates
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
