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", > > }; > > > >