| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5788718E.7080708@iommu.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:15:58 +0800
From: Wan Zongshun <vw@...mu.org>
To: Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, robh@...nel.org,
p.zabel@...gutronix.de, Wan Zongshun <mcuos.com@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] irqchip: add irqchip driver for nuc900
On 2016年07月14日 21:54, Jason Cooper wrote:
> Hi Wan Zongshun,
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:36:53AM +0800, Wan Zongshun wrote:
>> On 2016年07月14日 04:09, Jason Cooper wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 03:27:22PM +0800, Wan Zongshun wrote:
>>>> This patch is to add irqchip driver support for nuc900 plat,
>>>> current this driver only supports nuc970 SoC.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wan Zongshun <mcuos.com@...il.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm/mach-w90x900/include/mach/irqs.h | 5 +
>>>> drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 1 +
>>>> drivers/irqchip/irq-nuc900.c | 150 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 156 insertions(+)
>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-nuc900.c
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-w90x900/include/mach/irqs.h b/arch/arm/mach-w90x900/include/mach/irqs.h
>>>> index 9d5cba3..3b035c6 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-w90x900/include/mach/irqs.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-w90x900/include/mach/irqs.h
>>>> @@ -59,7 +59,12 @@
>>>> #define IRQ_KPI W90X900_IRQ(29)
>>>> #define IRQ_P2SGROUP W90X900_IRQ(30)
>>>> #define IRQ_ADC W90X900_IRQ(31)
>>>> +
>>>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_SOC_NUC900)
>>>> #define NR_IRQS (IRQ_ADC+1)
>>>> +#else
>>>> +#define NR_IRQS 62
>>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> Arnd already covered this...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> /*for irq group*/
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
>>>> index 38853a1..9ccd5af8a 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
>>>> @@ -69,3 +69,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PIC32_EVIC) += irq-pic32-evic.o
>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_MVEBU_ODMI) += irq-mvebu-odmi.o
>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_LS_SCFG_MSI) += irq-ls-scfg-msi.o
>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_EZNPS_GIC) += irq-eznps.o
>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_NUC970) += irq-nuc900.o
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-nuc900.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-nuc900.c
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..c4b2e39
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-nuc900.c
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Copyright 2016 Wan Zongshun <mcuos.com@...il.com>
>>>> + *
>>>> + * The code contained herein is licensed under the GNU General Public
>>>> + * License. You may obtain a copy of the GNU General Public License
>>>> + * Version 2 or later at the following locations:
>>>> + *
>>>> + * http://www.opensource.org/licenses/gpl-license.html
>>>> + * http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/init.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/irq.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/irqchip.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/io.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/ioport.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/of_irq.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <asm/exception.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/hardirq.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR1 0x00
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR2 0x04
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR3 0x08
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR4 0x0C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR5 0x10
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR6 0x14
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR7 0x18
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR8 0x1C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR9 0x20
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR10 0x24
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR11 0x28
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR12 0x2C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR13 0x30
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR14 0x34
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCR15 0x38
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IRSR 0x100
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IRSRH 0x104
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IASR 0x108
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IASRH 0x10C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_ISR 0x110
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_ISRH 0x114
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IPER 0x118
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_ISNR 0x120
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_OISR 0x124
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IMR 0x128
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_IMRH 0x12C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_MECR 0x130
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_MECRH 0x134
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_MDCR 0x138
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_MDCRH 0x13C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SSCR 0x140
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SSCRH 0x144
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCCR 0x148
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_SCCRH 0x14C
>>>> +#define REG_AIC_EOSCR 0x150
>>>
>>> Please remove unused defines.
>>
>> Okay.
>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static void __iomem *aic_base;
>>>> +static struct irq_domain *aic_domain;
>>>> +
>>>> +static void nuc900_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d)
>>>> +{
>>>> + if (d->irq < 32)
>>>> + writel(1 << (d->irq), aic_base + REG_AIC_MDCR);
>>>> + else
>>>> + writel(1 << (d->irq - 32), aic_base + REG_AIC_MDCRH);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static void nuc900_irq_ack(struct irq_data *d)
>>>> +{
>>>> + writel(0x01, aic_base + REG_AIC_EOSCR);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static void nuc900_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
>>>> +{
>>>> + if (d->irq < 32)
>>>> + writel(1 << (d->irq), aic_base + REG_AIC_MECR);
>>>> + else
>>>> + writel(1 << (d->irq - 32), aic_base + REG_AIC_MECRH);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static struct irq_chip nuc900_irq_chip = {
>>>> + .irq_ack = nuc900_irq_ack,
>>>> + .irq_mask = nuc900_irq_mask,
>>>> + .irq_unmask = nuc900_irq_unmask,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +void __exception_irq_entry aic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u32 hwirq;
>>>> +
>>>> + hwirq = readl(aic_base + REG_AIC_IPER);
>>>> + hwirq = readl(aic_base + REG_AIC_ISNR);
>>>> + if (!hwirq)
>>>> + writel(0x01, aic_base + REG_AIC_EOSCR);
>>>
>>> Could you explain what's going on here?
>>
>> AIC_IPER, When the AIC generates the interrupt, VECTOR represents
>> the interrupt channel number that is active, enabled, and has the
>> highest priority.
>>
>> The value of VECTOR is copied to the register AIC_ISNR thereafter by
>> the AIC. This register was restored a value 0 after it was read by
>> the
>> interrupt handler.
>
> So, iiuc, the first readl() of AIC_IPER kicks the AIC to copy the value
> of VECTOR into AIC_ISNR? Then we can read it?
>
> If so, please add a comment above the code explaining that.
>
>> So I must read two registers for one irq number, after read IPER,
>> the ISNR(bit0:5) will be updated. ISNR value has no need do offset,
>> it is better than read IPER(bit2:7).
>
> But you aren't using the value from the first readl(...AIC_IPER)? You
> overwrite hwirq with the value from the second readl(...AIC_ISNR)
> ...
>
> The first part of your explaination makes sense, but this part isn't
> clear to me.
Actually, I have two choice to implement this function:
option1:
void __exception_irq_entry aic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
u32 hwirq;
(void)readl(aic_base + REG_AIC_IPER);
hwirq = readl(aic_base + REG_AIC_ISNR);
handle_IRQ((irq_find_mapping(aic_domain, hwirq)), regs);
}
option2:
void __exception_irq_entry aic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
u32 hwirq;
hwirq = readl(aic_base + REG_AIC_IPER);
hwirq <<= 2;
handle_IRQ((irq_find_mapping(aic_domain, hwirq)), regs);
}
Though the option2 do shift for hwirq, but it seems better than do io
operation by readl,so I prefer to option2, agree?
>
>
>> “writel(0x01, aic_base + REG_AIC_EOSCR);” seems not necessary here,
>> since irqchip has the ack interface. I will remove it.
>
> Ok, thanks.
>
>> This AIC_EOSCR register is used by the interrupt service routine to
>> indicate that it is completely served. Thus, the
>> interrupt handler can write any value to this register to indicate
>> the end of its interrupt service.
>
> A short comment in the ack routine would be helpful.
>
>
>>>> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(nuc900, "nuvoton,nuc900-aic", aic_of_init);
>>>
>>> afaict, there is no 'nuc900', that's a family. If so, this compatible
>>> needs to be 'nuvoton,nuc970-aic'.
>>>
>>
>> IRQCHIP_DECLARE(nuvoton, "nuvoton,nuc900-aic", aic_of_init);, change
>> nuc900 to nuvoton, ok?
>
> No, I was only talking about the second argument. The compatible
> string. For devicetree, it needs to refer to a specific model number.
> I suspect 'nuc900' is equivalent to saying 'nuc9xx'. Meaning it refers
> to a family of devices. The compatible string needs to refer
> specifically to the first model that the binding is compatible with. In
> this case, I presume that would be 'nuvoton,nuc970-aic'.
>
> thx,
>
> Jason.
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists