From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63488C43217 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2022 13:17:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229448AbiKXNRF (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2022 08:17:05 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36816 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229379AbiKXNRF (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2022 08:17:05 -0500 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1B6AFCDD0; Thu, 24 Nov 2022 05:17:02 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1669295820; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3t5mTJ+9oFfobjpYgyouD4WEP6J1TnkxH7WUrKI7neU=; b=r0ITR9n291YHgrcpgT7yxfWBidJlwshxk+RhFkqCt8z9X5UuofbLPhrEVm7DHSvAFh3ocE o/co3Buen7CWOH3URbPFP3aszYUG2FxcDQU2eEQFzqjLePyUTnVzHVh4PllmxfLnMnta1R +GwsN+xcyklyIvI0NkjZSnyMvpmap4k2nfB8XGRaGeUtexlMEmdGSmnUT5vjESDRp8BK+C LclDHFvy1EimsWQ9d7J3Axfn/u4WSynshR6pTJ3X74JuJk+0xKVwgqG62N78P51oII+Wej b+eQn4HsKtGOG87sbyCVKKLdK3os1x5sTdu3e7s8YYt0cc8buWWgQNa8FS9y+w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1669295820; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3t5mTJ+9oFfobjpYgyouD4WEP6J1TnkxH7WUrKI7neU=; b=rQf0pQYAyyksuqVLLAylWKVzaRi5KPD4K5oquK0iInHKBuHiV0y45FTcVlTpUJT7w3PNGL 7SXhum3QgfsvvTCQ== To: Marc Zyngier Cc: LKML , Will Deacon , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jason Gunthorpe , Andrew Lunn , Gregory Clement , Sebastian Hesselbarth , Ammar Faizi , Robin Murphy , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Nishanth Menon , Tero Kristo , Santosh Shilimkar , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Vinod Koul , Sinan Kaya , Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Mark Rutland , Shameerali Kolothum Thodi , Zenghui Yu , Shawn Guo , Sascha Hauer , Fabio Estevam Subject: Re: [patch V2 06/40] PCI/MSI: Provide static key for parent mask/unmask In-Reply-To: <8635a8o65q.wl-maz@kernel.org> References: <20221121135653.208611233@linutronix.de> <20221121140048.659849460@linutronix.de> <8635a8o65q.wl-maz@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 14:17:00 +0100 Message-ID: <87bkowcx0z.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 24 2022 at 13:04, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:39:36 +0000, >> static void pci_mask_msi(struct irq_data *data) >> { >> struct msi_desc *desc = irq_data_get_msi_desc(data); >> >> pci_msi_mask(desc, BIT(data->irq - desc->irq)); >> + cond_mask_parent(data); > > I find this a bit odd. If anything, I'd rather drop the masking at the > PCI level and keep it local to the interrupt controller, because this > is likely to be more universal than the equivalent PCI operation > (think multi-MSI, for example, which cannot masks individual MSIs). > > Another thing is that the static key is a global state. Nothing says > that masking one way or the other is a universal thing, specially when > you have multiple interrupt controllers dealing with MSIs in different > ways. For example, GICv3 can use both the ITS and the GICv3-MBI frame > at the same time for different PCI RC. OK, they happen to deal with > MSIs in the same way, but you hopefully get my point. I'm fine with dropping that. I did this because basically all of the various ARM PCI/MSI domain implementation have a copy of the same functions. Some of them have pointlessly the wrong order because copy & pasta is so wonderful.... So the alternative solution is to provide _ONE_ set of correct callbacks and let the domain initialization code override the irq chip callbacks of the default PCI/MSI template. Thanks, tglx