[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9cbfdacba32c5e351fd9e14444768666@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 11:11:34 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@...aro.org>,
Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] PCI: uniphier: Add misc interrupt handler to
invoke PME and AER
On 2020-06-04 10:43, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
[...]
>>> -static void uniphier_pcie_irq_handler(struct irq_desc *desc)
>>> +static void uniphier_pcie_misc_isr(struct pcie_port *pp)
>>> {
>>> - struct pcie_port *pp = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
>>> struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_pp(pp);
>>> struct uniphier_pcie_priv *priv = to_uniphier_pcie(pci);
>>> - struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
>>> - unsigned long reg;
>>> - u32 val, bit, virq;
>>> + u32 val, virq;
>>>
>>> - /* INT for debug */
>>> val = readl(priv->base + PCL_RCV_INT);
>>>
>>> if (val & PCL_CFG_BW_MGT_STATUS)
>>> dev_dbg(pci->dev, "Link Bandwidth Management Event\n");
>>> +
>>> if (val & PCL_CFG_LINK_AUTO_BW_STATUS)
>>> dev_dbg(pci->dev, "Link Autonomous Bandwidth Event\n");
>>> - if (val & PCL_CFG_AER_RC_ERR_MSI_STATUS)
>>> - dev_dbg(pci->dev, "Root Error\n");
>>> - if (val & PCL_CFG_PME_MSI_STATUS)
>>> - dev_dbg(pci->dev, "PME Interrupt\n");
>>> +
>>> + if (pci_msi_enabled()) {
>>
>> This checks whether the kernel supports MSIs. Not that they are
>> enabled in your controller. Is that really what you want to do?
>
> The below two status bits are valid when the interrupt for MSI is
> asserted.
> That is, pci_msi_enabled() is wrong.
>
> I'll modify the function to check the two bits only if this function is
> called from MSI handler.
>
>>
>>> + if (val & PCL_CFG_AER_RC_ERR_MSI_STATUS) {
>>> + dev_dbg(pci->dev, "Root Error Status\n");
>>> + virq = irq_linear_revmap(pp->irq_domain, 0);
>>> + generic_handle_irq(virq);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (val & PCL_CFG_PME_MSI_STATUS) {
>>> + dev_dbg(pci->dev, "PME Interrupt\n");
>>> + virq = irq_linear_revmap(pp->irq_domain, 0);
>>> + generic_handle_irq(virq);
>>> + }
>>
>> These two cases do the exact same thing, calling the same interrupt.
>> What is the point of dealing with them independently?
>
> Both PME and AER are asserted from MSI-0, and each handler checks its
> own
> status bit in the PCIe register (aer_irq() in pcie/aer.c and
> pcie_pme_irq()
> in pcie/pme.c).
> So I think this handler calls generic_handle_irq() for the same MSI-0.
So what is wrong with
if (val & (PCL_CFG_AER_RC_ERR_MSI_STATUS |
PCL_CFG_PME_MSI_STATUS)) {
// handle interrupt
}
?
If you have two handlers for the same interrupt, this is a shared
interrupt and each handler will be called in turn.
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists