Hi Lorenzo,
On 02/03/2018 18:03, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> [+cc Shawn, Vignesh, Pratyush]
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:10:22PM +0000, Gustavo Pimentel wrote:
>> Changes into a new IRQ handler mechanism (multiplexed IRQ domain hierarchy)
>> more suitable and appropriate to use on pcie-designware and on each SoC
>> specific driver in order to allow new and more complex features like MSI-X.
>>
>> Adds Synopsys Root Complex driver support for MSI-X feature.
>>
>> Expands the maximum number of IRQs from 32 to 256 distributed by
>> a maximum of 8 controller registers.
>>
>> The patch set was made against the Bjorn's master branch (v4.16-rc1).
>>
>> Gustavo Pimentel (3):
>> PCI: dwc: Add new IRQ API
>> PCI: dwc: Remove old IRQ API
>> PCI: dwc: Expand maximum number of IRQs from 32 to 256
>>
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pci-exynos.c | 18 --
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pci-imx6.c | 18 --
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pci-keystone-dw.c | 91 +-------
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pci-keystone.c | 1 +
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pci-keystone.h | 4 +-
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pci-layerscape.c | 3 +-
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-artpec6.c | 18 --
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c | 398 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
>
> Hi Gustavo,
>
> I was reviewing a patch and this raised a question:
>
> - why pcie-histb.c is not in the list of converted drivers above,
> given that it uses dw_handle_msi_irq() the same way as others
> you converted ?
>
> Is it correct to leave pcie-histb.c as-is ? I do not think it is.
At the time the first series of this patch came out there wasn't such driver and
I just start working on this topic on December... Nevertheless, you are right it
should follow the same procedure that others.
diff --git a/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-histb.c b/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-histb.c
index 70b5c0b..5d47b90 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-histb.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-histb.c
@@ -207,13 +207,6 @@ static struct dw_pcie_host_ops histb_pcie_host_ops = {
.host_init = histb_pcie_host_init,
};
-static irqreturn_t histb_pcie_msi_irq_handler(int irq, void *arg)
-{
- struct pcie_port *pp = arg;
-
- return dw_handle_msi_irq(pp);
-}
-
static void histb_pcie_host_disable(struct histb_pcie *hipcie)
{
reset_control_assert(hipcie->soft_reset);
@@ -393,14 +386,6 @@ static int histb_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
dev_err(dev, "Failed to get MSI IRQ\n");
return pp->msi_irq;
}
-
- ret = devm_request_irq(dev, pp->msi_irq,
- histb_pcie_msi_irq_handler,
- IRQF_SHARED, "histb-pcie-msi", pp);
- if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "cannot request MSI IRQ\n");
- return ret;
- }
}
hipcie->phy = devm_phy_get(dev, "phy");
--
2.7.4
>
> I also would like to get this tested on DRA7 and SPEAR13XX which
> are the other host drivers using dw_handle_msi_irq() (even though
> in a different way than pcie-histb.c).
I think Kishon has already tested, however he never added the tested-by.
>
> The difference here seems to be struct pcie_port->msi_irq usage, that's
> extremely confusing how it is used (or not used) in the drivers I
> mentioned above.
>
> I have CC'ed the related maintainers I need feedback and this needs
> testing; this series code is in my branch:
>
> pci/dwc-msi
>
> Thanks,
> Lorenzo
>
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-plat.c | 16 --
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 30 ++-
>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 16 --
>> 11 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 355 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
>>
Thanks,
Gustavo
