On 2014/11/6 18:01, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Jiang Liu wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN
>> +static inline irq_hw_number_t
>> +msi_get_hwirq(struct pci_dev *pdev, struct msi_desc *msidesc)
>> +{
>> + return (irq_hw_number_t)msidesc->msi_attrib.entry_nr |
>> + PCI_DEVID(pdev->bus->number, pdev->devfn) << 11 |
>> + (pci_domain_nr(pdev->bus) & 0xFFFFFFFF) << 27;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int msi_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
>> + unsigned int nr_irqs, void *arg)
>> +{
>> + int i, ret;
>> + irq_hw_number_t hwirq = arch_msi_irq_domain_get_hwirq(arg);
>> +
>> + if (irq_find_mapping(domain, hwirq) > 0)
>> + return -EEXIST;
>> +
>> + ret = irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs, arg);
>> + if (ret >= 0)
>> + for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
>> + irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i,
>> + hwirq + i, &msi_chip, (void *)(long)i);
>
> I think msi_chip being a global unique thing is problematic. It does
> not allow multi platform kernels to select a chip at boot time and it
> does not allow per domain chip implementations when you have multiple
> msi domains. Aside of that msi_chip is a pretty bad name for a global.
>
> The solution is rather simple and msi is wide spread enough to justify
> that.
>
> struct irqdomain_msi_data {
> struct irq_chip *irq_chip;
> };
>
> We make that a struct so we can accomodate for other special things
> which might be domain rather than architecture specific. One
> obvious use case would be to hold the arch_msi_irq_domain_get/set_hwirq
> callbacks.
>
> struct irq_domain *msi_create_irq_domain(struct irq_domain *parent,
> struct irqdomain_msi_data
> *data)
> {
> struct irq_domain *domain;
>
> domain = irq_domain_add_tree(NULL, &msi_domain_ops, NULL);
> if (domain) {
> domain->parent = parent;
> domain->msi_data = data;
> }
> return domain;
> }
>
> Now the above becomes:
>
> struct irq_chip *msi_chip = domain->msi_data->irq_chip;
>
> irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i,
> hwirq + i, msi_chip, (void *)(long)i);
Hi Thomas,
Actually I'm working on a patch set to improve MSI support in
the way you described above this afternoon. And I'm also trying to
split MSI code into PCI dependent part and PCI independent part.
I plan to add a file kernel/irq/msi.c to host PCI independent part,
is that OK? Or should I put it under something like drivers/msi/?
The PCI indepenent part will be used to support DMAR/HPET/HTIRQ and
some ARM/ARM64 interrupts.
Regards!
Gerry
>
>> +int msi_irq_domain_alloc_irqs(struct irq_domain *domain, int type,
>> + struct pci_dev *dev, void *arg)
>> +{
>> + int i, virq;
>> + struct msi_desc *msidesc;
>> + int node = dev_to_node(&dev->dev);
>> +
>> + list_for_each_entry(msidesc, &dev->msi_list, list) {
>> + arch_msi_irq_domain_set_hwirq(arg, msi_get_hwirq(dev, msidesc));
>
> The arch_xxx callbacks want to be documented. It's not obvious what
> they are supposed to do.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
