On Tue, 19 May 2020 12:47:24 -0700
Florian Fainelli [off-list ref] wrote:

On 5/19/2020 9:17 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:

quoted

For irqchips using the fasteoi flow, IPIs are a bit special.

They need to be EOId early (before calling the handler), as
funny things may happen in the handler (they do not necessarily
behave like a normal interrupt), and that the arch code is
already handling the stats.

Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/irq.h |  1 +
 kernel/irq/chip.c   | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/irq.h b/include/linux/irq.h
index 8d5bc2c237d7..726f94d8b8cc 100644
--- a/include/linux/irq.h
+++ b/include/linux/irq.h

@@ -621,6 +621,7 @@ static inline int irq_set_parent(int irq, int parent_irq)
  */
 extern void handle_level_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
 extern void handle_fasteoi_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
+extern void handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_ipi(struct irq_desc *desc);
 extern void handle_edge_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
 extern void handle_edge_eoi_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
 extern void handle_simple_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);

diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
index 41e7e37a0928..7b0b789cfed4 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c

@@ -955,6 +955,32 @@ void handle_percpu_devid_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
 		chip->irq_eoi(&desc->irq_data);
 }
 
+/**
+ * handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_ipi - Per CPU local IPI handler with per cpu
+ *				     dev ids
+ * @desc:	the interrupt description structure for this irq
+ *
+ * The biggest differences with the IRQ version are that:
+ * - the interrupt is EOIed early, as the IPI could result in a context
+ *   switch, and we need to make sure the IPI can fire again
+ * - Stats are usually handled at the architecture level, so we ignore them
+ *   here
+ */
+void handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_ipi(struct irq_desc *desc)
+{
+	struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
+	struct irqaction *action = desc->action;
+	unsigned int irq = irq_desc_get_irq(desc);
+	irqreturn_t res;  

Should not this have a:

	if (!irq_settings_is_no_accounting(desc))
		__kstat_incr_irqs_this_cpu(desc);

here in case you are using that handler with a SGI interrupt which is
not used as an IPI?

I see you coming... ;-)

Yes, could do. TBH, I plan on killing the "no accounting" altogether
and move to the core IRQ one, so this would only be temporary. All I
need is to update the rest of the arm32 interrupt controllers...

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel