[PATCH v4 1/2] PCI: Add tango MSI controller support
From: robin.murphy@arm.com (Robin Murphy)
Date: 2017-05-24 10:00:53
Also in:
linux-pci, lkml
On 23/05/17 20:15, Mason wrote:
On 23/05/2017 20:03, Robin Murphy wrote:quoted
On 23/05/17 18:54, Mason wrote:quoted
On 23/05/2017 19:03, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:quoted
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 04:56:08PM +0200, Marc Gonzalez wrote:quoted
On 20/04/2017 16:28, Marc Gonzalez wrote:quoted
+static int tango_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data, + const struct cpumask *mask, bool force) +{ + return -EINVAL; +} + +static struct irq_chip tango_chip = { + .irq_ack = tango_ack, + .irq_mask = tango_mask, + .irq_unmask = tango_unmask, + .irq_set_affinity = tango_set_affinity, + .irq_compose_msi_msg = tango_compose_msi_msg, +};Hmmm... I'm wondering why .irq_set_affinity is required. static int setup_affinity(struct irq_desc *desc, struct cpumask *mask) first calls __irq_can_set_affinity() to check whether desc->irq_data.chip->irq_set_affinity) exists. then calls irq_do_set_affinity(&desc->irq_data, mask, false); which calls chip->irq_set_affinity(data, mask, force); = msi_domain_set_affinity() which calls parent->chip->irq_set_affinity() unconditionally. Would it make sense to test that the callback is implemented before calling it? [ 0.723895] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000I'm not sure what you're asking. Is this a bug report for the v4 tango driver?No.quoted
Or are you asking whether msi_domain_set_affinity() should be changed to check whether parent->chip->irq_set_affinity is implemented?Yes. The way things are implemented now, drivers are forced to define an irq_set_affinity callback, even if it just returns an error, otherwise, the kernel crashes, because of the unconditional function pointer deref.quoted
msi_domain_set_affinity() has called parent->chip->irq_set_affinity() without checking since it was added in 2014 by f3cf8bb0d6c3 ("genirq: Add generic msi irq domain support"), so if there's a problem here, it's most likely in the tango code.The issue is having to define an "empty" function. (Unnecessary code bloat and maintenance.)AFAICS, only one driver (other than this one) implements a "do nothing" set_affinity callback - everyone else who doesn't do anything hardware specific just passes it along via irq_chip_set_affinity_parent().I counted 4. Where did I mess up? advk_msi_set_affinity altera_msi_set_affinity nwl_msi_set_affinity vmd_irq_set_affinity tango_set_affinity
Fair point - I went through drivers/irqchip and the various arch-specific instances and found ls_scfg_msi_set_affinity(), but somehow skipped over drivers/pci. Anyway, I think the question stands of why are these handful of drivers *not* using irq_chip_set_affinity_parent()? As an outsider, it naively seems logical that the affinity of an MSI which just gets translated to a wired interrupt should propagate through to the affinity of that wired interrupt, but maybe there are reasons not to; I really don't know. Robin.