On 11/04/17 17:21, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 04:54:26PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: >> On 11/04/17 15:42, linucher...@gmail.com wrote: >>> From: Geetha <gak...@cavium.com> >>> >>> Cavium 99xx SMMU implementation doesn't not support unique irq lines for >>> gerror, eventq and cmdq-sync. USE_SHARED_IRQS option enables to use single >>> irq line for all three interrupts. >> >> AFAICS, there's nothing actually wrong with using shared wired IRQs - >> the architecture spec doesn't appear to say anything about it. I think >> it might suffice to simply add IRQF_SHARED if we can see the SMMU >> doesn't support MSIs anyway - it doesn't really seem like something we >> need to treat as a specific quirk. > > No, this is not permitted by the spec. See 3.18.2 ("Interrupt sources"), > where it's clear that each source asserts a *unique* wired interrupt.
Perhaps I'm reading it too generously; it does indeed specify that the *implementation* has to provide a unique output for each source, but other than suggesting a particular mode of operation based on that I don't see anything actually forbidding the *integration* from then just munging those lines together externally, as integrators so often like to do. That's the case I had in mind. Robin. > > Geetha: does your implementation support MSIs? > > Will > _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu