On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 11:35 +0800, Ryder Lee wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-01-21 at 19:59 +0800, Jianjun Wang wrote:
> > There is no need to create the inner domain as a parent for MSI domian,
> > some feature has been implemented by MSI framework.
> >
> > Remove the inner domain and its irq chip, it will be more closer to the
> > hardware implementation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jianjun Wang <jianjun.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-mediatek.c | 82 +++++++++++---------------
> > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-mediatek.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-mediatek.c
> > index 8d05df56158b..216e6fa8aec0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-mediatek.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-mediatek.c
> > @@ -169,7 +169,6 @@ struct mtk_pcie_soc {
> > * @slot: port slot
> > * @irq: GIC irq
> > * @irq_domain: legacy INTx IRQ domain
> > - * @inner_domain: inner IRQ domain
> > * @msi_domain: MSI IRQ domain
> > * @lock: protect the msi_irq_in_use bitmap
> > * @msi_irq_in_use: bit map for assigned MSI IRQ
> > @@ -190,7 +189,6 @@ struct mtk_pcie_port {
> > u32 slot;
> > int irq;
> > struct irq_domain *irq_domain;
> > - struct irq_domain *inner_domain;
> > struct irq_domain *msi_domain;
> > struct mutex lock;
> > DECLARE_BITMAP(msi_irq_in_use, MTK_MSI_IRQS_NUM);
> > @@ -418,22 +416,25 @@ static void mtk_msi_ack_irq(struct irq_data *data)
> > u32 hwirq = data->hwirq;
> >
> > writel(1 << hwirq, port->base + PCIE_IMSI_STATUS);
> > + writel(MSI_STATUS, port->base + PCIE_INT_STATUS);
> > }
> >
> > -static struct irq_chip mtk_msi_bottom_irq_chip = {
> > - .name = "MTK MSI",
> > +static struct irq_chip mtk_msi_irq_chip = {
> > + .name = "MTK PCIe",
> > .irq_compose_msi_msg = mtk_compose_msi_msg,
> > + .irq_write_msi_msg = pci_msi_domain_write_msg,
> > .irq_set_affinity = mtk_msi_set_affinity,
> > .irq_ack = mtk_msi_ack_irq,
> > + .irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq,
> > + .irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq,
> > };
>
> (...omitted...)
>
> To keep the patch simple, we don't need to adjust the position for
> mtk_msi_irq_chip.
OK, I will fix it in next version, thanks.
>
> > -
> > -static struct irq_chip mtk_msi_irq_chip = {
> > - .name = "MTK PCIe MSI",
> > - .irq_ack = irq_chip_ack_parent,
> > - .irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq,
> > - .irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq,
> > +static struct msi_domain_ops mtk_msi_domain_ops = {
> > + .get_hwirq = mtk_pcie_msi_get_hwirq,
> > + .msi_free = mtk_pcie_msi_free,
> > };
> >
> > static struct msi_domain_info mtk_msi_domain_info = {
> > - .flags = (MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_DOM_OPS | MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS |
> > - MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX),
> > - .chip = &mtk_msi_irq_chip,
> > + .flags = (MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_DOM_OPS |
> > + MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS | MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX),
> > + .ops = &mtk_msi_domain_ops,
> > + .chip = &mtk_msi_irq_chip,
> > + .handler = handle_edge_irq,
> > + .handler_name = "MSI",
> > };
> >
>
>
