From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932141Ab1IRANW (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2011 20:13:22 -0400 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:34288 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751050Ab1IRANV (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2011 20:13:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:13:17 -0600 From: Grant Likely To: Rob Herring Cc: Marc Zyngier , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "thomas.abraham@linaro.org" , "jamie@jamieiles.com" , "b-cousson@ti.com" , "shawn.guo@linaro.org" , Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ARM: gic: add OF based initialization Message-ID: <20110918001317.GB3523@ponder.secretlab.ca> References: <1316017900-19918-1-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <1316017900-19918-6-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <4E70E88E.4090503@arm.com> <4E70EB1F.4060000@gmail.com> <4E70F3C9.2010202@arm.com> <4E70F7BE.6020909@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E70F7BE.6020909@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 01:51:42PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On 09/14/2011 01:34 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > On 14/09/11 18:57, Rob Herring wrote: > >> Marc, > >> > >> On 09/14/2011 12:46 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >>> On 14/09/11 17:31, Rob Herring wrote: > >>>> From: Rob Herring > >>>> > >>>> This adds gic initialization using device tree data. The initialization > >>>> functions are intended to be called by a generic OF interrupt > >>>> controller parsing function once the right pieces are in place. > >>>> > >>>> PPIs are handled using 3rd cell of interrupts properties to specify the cpu > >>>> mask the PPI is assigned to. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> arch/arm/common/gic.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>>> arch/arm/include/asm/hardware/gic.h | 10 +++++ > >>>> 3 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>> index 0000000..6c513de > >>>> --- /dev/null > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ > >>>> +* ARM Generic Interrupt Controller > >>>> + > >>>> +ARM SMP cores are often associated with a GIC, providing per processor > >>>> +interrupts (PPI), shared processor interrupts (SPI) and software > >>>> +generated interrupts (SGI). > >>>> + > >>>> +Primary GIC is attached directly to the CPU and typically has PPIs and SGIs. > >>>> +Secondary GICs are cascaded into the upward interrupt controller and do not > >>>> +have PPIs or SGIs. > >>>> + > >>>> +Main node required properties: > >>>> + > >>>> +- compatible : should be one of: > >>>> + "arm,cortex-a9-gic" > >>>> + "arm,arm11mp-gic" > >>>> +- interrupt-controller : Identifies the node as an interrupt controller > >>>> +- #interrupt-cells : Specifies the number of cells needed to encode an > >>>> + interrupt source. The type shall be a and the value shall be 3. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 1st cell is the interrupt number. 0-15 are reserved for SGIs. 16-31 are > >>>> + for PPIs. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 2nd cell is the level-sense information, encoded as follows: > >>>> + 1 = low-to-high edge triggered > >>>> + 2 = high-to-low edge triggered > >>>> + 4 = active high level-sensitive > >>>> + 8 = active low level-sensitive > >>>> + > >>>> + Only values of 1 and 4 are valid for GIC 1.0 spec. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 3rd cell contains the mask of the cpu number for the interrupt source. > >>>> + The cpu mask is only valid for PPIs and shall be 0 for SPIs. This value shall > >>>> + be 0 for PPIs. > >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >>> > >>> Typo here ? The way I understand it, it should read "For PPIs, this > >>> value shall be the mask of the possible CPU numbers for the interrupt > >>> source" (or something to similar effect...). > >>> > >> > >> Cut and paste error. This sentence goes in the previous paragraph. What > >> I meant is the 2nd cell should contain 0 for PPIs as you cannot set the > >> edge/level on PPIs (that is always true, right?). I probably should also > >> add 0 in the list of values. > > > > Ah, right. It makes sense indeed. You're correct about PPIs polarity, > > this is defined by the hardware and cannot be configured. But it may be > > interesting to have the DT to reflect the way the hardware is actually > > configured (on the Cortex-A9, some PPIs are configured active-low, and > > others are rising-edge). > > So we should allow specifying what it is as the OS may need to know that. If it is a difference between level & edge, then the OS absolutely needs to know about it. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ARM: gic: add OF based initialization Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:13:17 -0600 Message-ID: <20110918001317.GB3523@ponder.secretlab.ca> References: <1316017900-19918-1-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <1316017900-19918-6-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <4E70E88E.4090503@arm.com> <4E70EB1F.4060000@gmail.com> <4E70F3C9.2010202@arm.com> <4E70F7BE.6020909@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E70F7BE.6020909-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: "devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Rob Herring , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 01:51:42PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On 09/14/2011 01:34 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > On 14/09/11 18:57, Rob Herring wrote: > >> Marc, > >> > >> On 09/14/2011 12:46 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >>> On 14/09/11 17:31, Rob Herring wrote: > >>>> From: Rob Herring > >>>> > >>>> This adds gic initialization using device tree data. The initialization > >>>> functions are intended to be called by a generic OF interrupt > >>>> controller parsing function once the right pieces are in place. > >>>> > >>>> PPIs are handled using 3rd cell of interrupts properties to specify the cpu > >>>> mask the PPI is assigned to. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> arch/arm/common/gic.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>>> arch/arm/include/asm/hardware/gic.h | 10 +++++ > >>>> 3 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>> index 0000000..6c513de > >>>> --- /dev/null > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ > >>>> +* ARM Generic Interrupt Controller > >>>> + > >>>> +ARM SMP cores are often associated with a GIC, providing per processor > >>>> +interrupts (PPI), shared processor interrupts (SPI) and software > >>>> +generated interrupts (SGI). > >>>> + > >>>> +Primary GIC is attached directly to the CPU and typically has PPIs and SGIs. > >>>> +Secondary GICs are cascaded into the upward interrupt controller and do not > >>>> +have PPIs or SGIs. > >>>> + > >>>> +Main node required properties: > >>>> + > >>>> +- compatible : should be one of: > >>>> + "arm,cortex-a9-gic" > >>>> + "arm,arm11mp-gic" > >>>> +- interrupt-controller : Identifies the node as an interrupt controller > >>>> +- #interrupt-cells : Specifies the number of cells needed to encode an > >>>> + interrupt source. The type shall be a and the value shall be 3. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 1st cell is the interrupt number. 0-15 are reserved for SGIs. 16-31 are > >>>> + for PPIs. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 2nd cell is the level-sense information, encoded as follows: > >>>> + 1 = low-to-high edge triggered > >>>> + 2 = high-to-low edge triggered > >>>> + 4 = active high level-sensitive > >>>> + 8 = active low level-sensitive > >>>> + > >>>> + Only values of 1 and 4 are valid for GIC 1.0 spec. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 3rd cell contains the mask of the cpu number for the interrupt source. > >>>> + The cpu mask is only valid for PPIs and shall be 0 for SPIs. This value shall > >>>> + be 0 for PPIs. > >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >>> > >>> Typo here ? The way I understand it, it should read "For PPIs, this > >>> value shall be the mask of the possible CPU numbers for the interrupt > >>> source" (or something to similar effect...). > >>> > >> > >> Cut and paste error. This sentence goes in the previous paragraph. What > >> I meant is the 2nd cell should contain 0 for PPIs as you cannot set the > >> edge/level on PPIs (that is always true, right?). I probably should also > >> add 0 in the list of values. > > > > Ah, right. It makes sense indeed. You're correct about PPIs polarity, > > this is defined by the hardware and cannot be configured. But it may be > > interesting to have the DT to reflect the way the hardware is actually > > configured (on the Cortex-A9, some PPIs are configured active-low, and > > others are rising-edge). > > So we should allow specifying what it is as the OS may need to know that. If it is a difference between level & edge, then the OS absolutely needs to know about it. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:13:17 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 5/5] ARM: gic: add OF based initialization In-Reply-To: <4E70F7BE.6020909@gmail.com> References: <1316017900-19918-1-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <1316017900-19918-6-git-send-email-robherring2@gmail.com> <4E70E88E.4090503@arm.com> <4E70EB1F.4060000@gmail.com> <4E70F3C9.2010202@arm.com> <4E70F7BE.6020909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20110918001317.GB3523@ponder.secretlab.ca> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 01:51:42PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On 09/14/2011 01:34 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > On 14/09/11 18:57, Rob Herring wrote: > >> Marc, > >> > >> On 09/14/2011 12:46 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >>> On 14/09/11 17:31, Rob Herring wrote: > >>>> From: Rob Herring > >>>> > >>>> This adds gic initialization using device tree data. The initialization > >>>> functions are intended to be called by a generic OF interrupt > >>>> controller parsing function once the right pieces are in place. > >>>> > >>>> PPIs are handled using 3rd cell of interrupts properties to specify the cpu > >>>> mask the PPI is assigned to. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> arch/arm/common/gic.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>>> arch/arm/include/asm/hardware/gic.h | 10 +++++ > >>>> 3 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>> index 0000000..6c513de > >>>> --- /dev/null > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ > >>>> +* ARM Generic Interrupt Controller > >>>> + > >>>> +ARM SMP cores are often associated with a GIC, providing per processor > >>>> +interrupts (PPI), shared processor interrupts (SPI) and software > >>>> +generated interrupts (SGI). > >>>> + > >>>> +Primary GIC is attached directly to the CPU and typically has PPIs and SGIs. > >>>> +Secondary GICs are cascaded into the upward interrupt controller and do not > >>>> +have PPIs or SGIs. > >>>> + > >>>> +Main node required properties: > >>>> + > >>>> +- compatible : should be one of: > >>>> + "arm,cortex-a9-gic" > >>>> + "arm,arm11mp-gic" > >>>> +- interrupt-controller : Identifies the node as an interrupt controller > >>>> +- #interrupt-cells : Specifies the number of cells needed to encode an > >>>> + interrupt source. The type shall be a and the value shall be 3. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 1st cell is the interrupt number. 0-15 are reserved for SGIs. 16-31 are > >>>> + for PPIs. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 2nd cell is the level-sense information, encoded as follows: > >>>> + 1 = low-to-high edge triggered > >>>> + 2 = high-to-low edge triggered > >>>> + 4 = active high level-sensitive > >>>> + 8 = active low level-sensitive > >>>> + > >>>> + Only values of 1 and 4 are valid for GIC 1.0 spec. > >>>> + > >>>> + The 3rd cell contains the mask of the cpu number for the interrupt source. > >>>> + The cpu mask is only valid for PPIs and shall be 0 for SPIs. This value shall > >>>> + be 0 for PPIs. > >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >>> > >>> Typo here ? The way I understand it, it should read "For PPIs, this > >>> value shall be the mask of the possible CPU numbers for the interrupt > >>> source" (or something to similar effect...). > >>> > >> > >> Cut and paste error. This sentence goes in the previous paragraph. What > >> I meant is the 2nd cell should contain 0 for PPIs as you cannot set the > >> edge/level on PPIs (that is always true, right?). I probably should also > >> add 0 in the list of values. > > > > Ah, right. It makes sense indeed. You're correct about PPIs polarity, > > this is defined by the hardware and cannot be configured. But it may be > > interesting to have the DT to reflect the way the hardware is actually > > configured (on the Cortex-A9, some PPIs are configured active-low, and > > others are rising-edge). > > So we should allow specifying what it is as the OS may need to know that. If it is a difference between level & edge, then the OS absolutely needs to know about it.