Thread (134 messages) 134 messages, 10 authors, 2021-04-01

Re: [RFT PATCH v3 16/27] irqchip/apple-aic: Add support for the Apple Interrupt Controller

From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-03-24 19:58:55
Also in: linux-arm-kernel, linux-devicetree, linux-doc, linux-samsung-soc, linux-serial, lkml

Hi Hector,

Sorry it took me so long to get to this. Some comments below.

On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 06:38:51AM +0900, Hector Martin wrote:
This is the root interrupt controller used on Apple ARM SoCs such as the
M1. This irqchip driver performs multiple functions:

* Handles both IRQs and FIQs

* Drives the AIC peripheral itself (which handles IRQs)

* Dispatches FIQs to downstream hard-wired clients (currently the ARM
  timer).

* Implements a virtual IPI multiplexer to funnel multiple Linux IPIs
  into a single hardware IPI

Signed-off-by: Hector Martin <redacted>
---
 MAINTAINERS                     |   2 +
 drivers/irqchip/Kconfig         |   8 +
 drivers/irqchip/Makefile        |   1 +
 drivers/irqchip/irq-apple-aic.c | 710 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/cpuhotplug.h      |   1 +
 5 files changed, 722 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-apple-aic.c
[...]
+ * Implementation notes:
+ *
+ * - This driver creates two IRQ domains, one for HW IRQs and internal FIQs,
+ *   and one for IPIs.
+ * - Since Linux needs more than 2 IPIs, we implement a software IRQ controller
+ *   and funnel all IPIs into one per-CPU IPI (the second "self" IPI is unused).
+ * - FIQ hwirq numbers are assigned after true hwirqs, and are per-cpu.
+ * - DT bindings use 3-cell form (like GIC):
+ *   - <0 nr flags> - hwirq #nr
+ *   - <1 nr flags> - FIQ #nr
+ *     - nr=0  Physical HV timer
+ *     - nr=1  Virtual HV timer
+ *     - nr=2  Physical guest timer
+ *     - nr=3  Virtual guest timer
+ *
+ */
+
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) "%s: " fmt, __func__
General nit: but I suspect many of the prints in here probably want to be
using the *_ratelimited variants.
+static void __exception_irq_entry aic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+	struct aic_irq_chip *ic = aic_irqc;
+	u32 event, type, irq;
+
+	do {
+		/*
+		 * We cannot use a relaxed read here, as DMA needs to be
+		 * ordered with respect to the IRQ firing.
+		 */
I think this could be a bit clearer: the readl() doesn't order any DMA
accesses, but instead means that subsequent reads by the CPU are ordered
(which may be from a buffer which was DMA'd to) are ordered after the
read of the MMIO register.
+		event = readl(ic->base + AIC_EVENT);
+		type = FIELD_GET(AIC_EVENT_TYPE, event);
+		irq = FIELD_GET(AIC_EVENT_NUM, event);
+
+		if (type == AIC_EVENT_TYPE_HW)
+			handle_domain_irq(aic_irqc->hw_domain, irq, regs);
+		else if (type == AIC_EVENT_TYPE_IPI && irq == 1)
+			aic_handle_ipi(regs);
+		else if (event != 0)
+			pr_err("Unknown IRQ event %d, %d\n", type, irq);
+	} while (event);
+
+	/*
+	 * vGIC maintenance interrupts end up here too, so we need to check
+	 * for them separately. Just report and disable vGIC for now, until
+	 * we implement this properly.
+	 */
+	if ((read_sysreg_s(SYS_ICH_HCR_EL2) & ICH_HCR_EN) &&
+		read_sysreg_s(SYS_ICH_MISR_EL2) != 0) {
+		pr_err("vGIC IRQ fired, disabling.\n");
+		sysreg_clear_set_s(SYS_ICH_HCR_EL2, ICH_HCR_EN, 0);
+	}
What prevents all these system register accesses being speculated up before
the handler?
+}
+
+static int aic_irq_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
+				const struct cpumask *mask_val, bool force)
+{
+	irq_hw_number_t hwirq = irqd_to_hwirq(d);
+	struct aic_irq_chip *ic = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
+	int cpu;
+
+	if (hwirq > ic->nr_hw)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (force)
+		cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val);
+	else
+		cpu = cpumask_any_and(mask_val, cpu_online_mask);
+
+	aic_ic_write(ic, AIC_TARGET_CPU + hwirq * 4, BIT(cpu));
+	irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
+
+	return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK;
+}
+
+static int aic_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
+{
+	return (type == IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH) ? 0 : -EINVAL;
+}
+
+static struct irq_chip aic_chip = {
+	.name = "AIC",
+	.irq_mask = aic_irq_mask,
+	.irq_unmask = aic_irq_unmask,
I know these are driven by the higher-level irq chip code, but I'm a bit
confused as to what provides ordering if, e.g. something ends up calling:

	aic_chip.irq_mask(d);
	...
	aic_chip.irq_unmask(d);

I can't see any ISBs in here and they're writing to two different registers,
so can we end up with the IRQ masked after this sequence?
+/*
+ * IPI irqchip
+ */
+
+static void aic_ipi_mask(struct irq_data *d)
+{
+	u32 irq_bit = BIT(irqd_to_hwirq(d));
+	int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
+
+	/* No specific ordering requirements needed here. */
+	atomic_andnot(irq_bit, &aic_vipi_enable[this_cpu]);
+}
Why not use a per-cpu variable here instead of an array of atomics? The pcpu
API has things for atomic updates (e.g. or, and, xchg).
+static void aic_ipi_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
+{
+	struct aic_irq_chip *ic = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
+	u32 irq_bit = BIT(irqd_to_hwirq(d));
+	int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
+
+	/*
+	 * This must complete before the atomic_read_acquire() below to avoid
+	 * racing aic_ipi_send_mask(). Use a dummy fetch op with release
+	 * semantics for this. This is arch-specific: ARMv8 B2.3.3 specifies
+	 * that writes with Release semantics are Barrier-ordered-before reads
+	 * with Acquire semantics, even though the Linux arch-independent
+	 * definition of these atomic ops does not.
+	 */
I think a more idiomatic (and portable) way to do this would be to use
the relaxed accessors, but with smp_mb__after_atomic() between them. Do you
have a good reason for _not_ doing it like that?
+	(void)atomic_fetch_or_release(irq_bit, &aic_vipi_enable[this_cpu]);
+
+	/*
+	 * If a pending vIPI was unmasked, raise a HW IPI to ourselves.
+	 * No barriers needed here since this is a self-IPI.
+	 */
+	if (atomic_read_acquire(&aic_vipi_flag[this_cpu]) & irq_bit)
"No barriers needed here" right before an acquire is confusing ;)
+		aic_ic_write(ic, AIC_IPI_SEND, AIC_IPI_SEND_CPU(this_cpu));
+}
+
+static void aic_ipi_send_mask(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask)
+{
+	struct aic_irq_chip *ic = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
+	u32 irq_bit = BIT(irqd_to_hwirq(d));
+	u32 send = 0;
+	int cpu;
+	unsigned long pending;
+
+	for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
+		/*
+		 * This sequence is the mirror of the one in aic_ipi_unmask();
+		 * see the comment there. Additionally, release semantics
+		 * ensure that the vIPI flag set is ordered after any shared
+		 * memory accesses that precede it. This therefore also pairs
+		 * with the atomic_fetch_andnot in aic_handle_ipi().
+		 */
+		pending = atomic_fetch_or_release(irq_bit, &aic_vipi_flag[cpu]);
(same here)
+		if (!(pending & irq_bit) && (atomic_read_acquire(&aic_vipi_enable[cpu]) & irq_bit))
+			send |= AIC_IPI_SEND_CPU(cpu);
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * The flag writes must complete before the physical IPI is issued
+	 * to another CPU. This is implied by the control dependency on
+	 * the result of atomic_read_acquire() above, which is itself
+	 * already ordered after the vIPI flag write.
+	 */
+	if (send)
+		aic_ic_write(ic, AIC_IPI_SEND, send);
+}
+
+static struct irq_chip ipi_chip = {
+	.name = "AIC-IPI",
+	.irq_mask = aic_ipi_mask,
+	.irq_unmask = aic_ipi_unmask,
+	.ipi_send_mask = aic_ipi_send_mask,
+};
+
+/*
+ * IPI IRQ domain
+ */
+
+static void aic_handle_ipi(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+	int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
+	int i;
+	unsigned long enabled, firing;
+
+	/*
+	 * Ack the IPI. We need to order this after the AIC event read, but
+	 * that is enforced by normal MMIO ordering guarantees.
+	 */
+	aic_ic_write(aic_irqc, AIC_IPI_ACK, AIC_IPI_OTHER);
+
+	/*
+	 * The mask read does not need to be ordered. Only we can change
+	 * our own mask anyway, so no races are possible here, as long as
+	 * we are properly in the interrupt handler (which is covered by
+	 * the barrier that is part of the top-level AIC handler's readl()).
+	 */
+	enabled = atomic_read(&aic_vipi_enable[this_cpu]);
+
+	/*
+	 * Clear the IPIs we are about to handle. This pairs with the
+	 * atomic_fetch_or_release() in aic_ipi_send_mask(), and needs to be
+	 * ordered after the aic_ic_write() above (to avoid dropping vIPIs) and
+	 * before IPI handling code (to avoid races handling vIPIs before they
+	 * are signaled). The former is taken care of by the release semantics
+	 * of the write portion, while the latter is taken care of by the
+	 * acquire semantics of the read portion.
+	 */
+	firing = atomic_fetch_andnot(enabled, &aic_vipi_flag[this_cpu]) & enabled;
Does this also need to be ordered after the Ack? For example, if we have
something like:

CPU 0						CPU 1
						<some other IPI>
aic_ipi_send_mask()
						atomic_fetch_andnot(flag)
	atomic_fetch_or_release(flag)
	aic_ic_write(AIC_IPI_SEND)
						aic_ic_write(AIC_IPI_ACK)

sorry if it's a stupid question, I'm just not sure about the cases in which
the hardware will pend things for you.

Will
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help