Thread (34 messages) 34 messages, 8 authors, 2018-08-04

Re: [PATCH 3/6] irqchip: RISC-V Local Interrupt Controller Driver

From: Thomas Gleixner <hidden>
Date: 2018-08-01 18:55:19
Also in: linux-riscv, lkml

On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:18:39PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
quoted
This feels odd. It means that you cannot have the following sequence:

	local_irq_disable();
	enable_irq(x); // where x is owned by a remote hart

as smp_call_function_single() requires interrupts to be enabled.

More fundamentally, why are you trying to make these interrupts look
global while they aren't? arm/arm64 have similar restrictions with GICv2
and earlier, and treats these interrupts as per-cpu.

Given that the drivers that deal with drivers connected to the per-hart
irqchip are themselves likely to be aware of the per-cpu aspect, it
would make sense to align things (we've been through that same
discussion about the clocksource driver a few weeks back).
Right now the only direct consumers are said clocksource, the PLIC
driver later in this series and the RISC-V arch IPI code.  None of them
is going to do a manual enable_irq, so I guess the remote case of the
code is simply dead code.  I'll take a look at converting them to
per-cpu.  I guess the GICv2 driver is the best template?
Confused. The timer and the IPI are separate causes and have nothing to do
with the per cpu irq domain. That's what the low level interrupt handling
code tells me.

If I understand correctly then the per cpu irq domain is for device
interrupts, right? If so, then this simply cannot work and there is no way
to make it work with per cpu interrupts either.

Is there some high level documentation about the design (or the lack of) or
can someone give a concise explanation how this stuff is supposed to work?

Thanks,

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