Re: [PATCH 09/15] irq: arm: perform irqentry in entry code
From: Vladimir Murzin <hidden>
Date: 2021-11-30 08:49:30
Also in:
lkml
On 10/23/21 2:36 PM, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
On 10/23/21 2:18 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:quoted
On Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:06:25 +0100, Vladimir Murzin [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 10/22/21 7:43 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:quoted
On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 18:58:54 +0100, Mark Rutland [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 05:34:20PM +0100, Vladimir Murzin wrote:[...]quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
As for TODO, is [1] look something you have been thinking of? IIUC, the show stopper is that hwirq is being passed from exception entry which retrieved via xPSR (IPSR to be precise). OTOH hwirq also available via Interrupt Controller Status Register (ICSR) thus can be used in driver itself... I gave [1] a go and it runs fine, yet I admit I might be missing something...I hadn't thought about it in much detail, but that looks good! I was wondering if we needed something like a handle_arch_vectored_irq(), but if we can rely on the ICSR that seems simpler overall. I'm not at all familiar with M-class, so I'm not sure if there are pitfalls in this area.Why can't we just use IPSR instead from the C code? It has the potential of being of lower latency then a MMIO read (though I have no idea whether it makes a material difference on M-class) and from what I can see in the arch spec, they are strictly equivalent.Hmmm, less arch specific asm(s) in driver code, no?Well, it isn't like this driver is going to be useful on anything else, is it?Well, with some work to unwire it from arch/arm it can be COMPILE_TEST :)quoted
If there is no overhead in reading from MMIO compared to the architected register, then I agree that ICSR is the way to go. Is there any chance you could measure it on a HW platform? Or maybe in emulation?My MPS{2,3} boards left in office and I'm on holiday next week... OTOH, I have no strong opinion on ICSR vs IPSR, I just wanted to check how much work it'd be to close TODO per my (quite limited) understanding :)
One month and a week later... I observe that in terms of performance MRS r0, ipsr is equivalent to readl_relaxed(BASEADDR_V7M_SCB + V7M_SCB_ICSR) MOV.W r3, #3758153728 LDR.W r0, [r3, #3332] Old compilers can produce less performant sequence like LDR r3,0xbcc0 ADD.W r3,r3,#0xaf00 LDR r0,[r3,#0] So, what would be your preference? Cheers Vladimir
Cheers Vladimirquoted
Thanks, M.
_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel