All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
To: <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, <andre.przywara@arm.com>,
	<eric.auger@redhat.com>, <drjones@redhat.com>
Cc: <tglx@linutronix.de>, <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	<wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Correct the usage of GICD_CTLR's RWP field
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 04:15:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1557720954-6592-1-git-send-email-yuzenghui@huawei.com> (raw)

As per ARM IHI 0069D, GICD_CTLR's RWP field tracks updates to:

	GICD_CTLR's Group Enable bits, for transitions from 1 to 0 only
	GICD_CTLR's ARE bits, E1NWF bit and DS bit (if we have)
	GICD_ICENABLER<n>

We seemed use this field in an inappropriate way, somewhere in the
GIC-v3 driver. For some examples:

In gic_set_affinity(), if the interrupt was not enabled, we only need
to write GICD_IROUTER<n> with the appropriate mpidr value. Updates to
GICD_IROUTER will not be tracked by RWP field, and we can remove the
unnecessary RWP waiting.

In gic_dist_init(), we "Enable distributor with ARE, Group1" by writing
to GICD_CTLR, and we should use gic_dist_wait_for_rwp() here.

These two are obvious cases, and there are some other cases where we don't
need to do RWP waiting, such as in gic_configure_irq() and gic_poke_irq().
But too many modifications makes me not confident. It's hard for me to say
whether this patch is doing the right thing and how does the RWP waiting
affect the system, thus RFC.

Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 8 ++------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
index 15e55d3..8d63950 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
@@ -600,6 +600,7 @@ static void __init gic_dist_init(void)
 	/* Enable distributor with ARE, Group1 */
 	writel_relaxed(GICD_CTLR_ARE_NS | GICD_CTLR_ENABLE_G1A | GICD_CTLR_ENABLE_G1,
 		       base + GICD_CTLR);
+	gic_dist_wait_for_rwp();
 
 	/*
 	 * Set all global interrupts to the boot CPU only. ARE must be
@@ -986,14 +987,9 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
 
 	gic_write_irouter(val, reg);
 
-	/*
-	 * If the interrupt was enabled, enabled it again. Otherwise,
-	 * just wait for the distributor to have digested our changes.
-	 */
+	/* If the interrupt was enabled, enabled it again. */
 	if (enabled)
 		gic_unmask_irq(d);
-	else
-		gic_dist_wait_for_rwp();
 
 	irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
 
-- 
1.8.3.1



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
To: <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, <andre.przywara@arm.com>,
	<eric.auger@redhat.com>,  <drjones@redhat.com>
Cc: jason@lakedaemon.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Correct the usage of GICD_CTLR's RWP field
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 04:15:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1557720954-6592-1-git-send-email-yuzenghui@huawei.com> (raw)

As per ARM IHI 0069D, GICD_CTLR's RWP field tracks updates to:

	GICD_CTLR's Group Enable bits, for transitions from 1 to 0 only
	GICD_CTLR's ARE bits, E1NWF bit and DS bit (if we have)
	GICD_ICENABLER<n>

We seemed use this field in an inappropriate way, somewhere in the
GIC-v3 driver. For some examples:

In gic_set_affinity(), if the interrupt was not enabled, we only need
to write GICD_IROUTER<n> with the appropriate mpidr value. Updates to
GICD_IROUTER will not be tracked by RWP field, and we can remove the
unnecessary RWP waiting.

In gic_dist_init(), we "Enable distributor with ARE, Group1" by writing
to GICD_CTLR, and we should use gic_dist_wait_for_rwp() here.

These two are obvious cases, and there are some other cases where we don't
need to do RWP waiting, such as in gic_configure_irq() and gic_poke_irq().
But too many modifications makes me not confident. It's hard for me to say
whether this patch is doing the right thing and how does the RWP waiting
affect the system, thus RFC.

Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 8 ++------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
index 15e55d3..8d63950 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
@@ -600,6 +600,7 @@ static void __init gic_dist_init(void)
 	/* Enable distributor with ARE, Group1 */
 	writel_relaxed(GICD_CTLR_ARE_NS | GICD_CTLR_ENABLE_G1A | GICD_CTLR_ENABLE_G1,
 		       base + GICD_CTLR);
+	gic_dist_wait_for_rwp();
 
 	/*
 	 * Set all global interrupts to the boot CPU only. ARE must be
@@ -986,14 +987,9 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
 
 	gic_write_irouter(val, reg);
 
-	/*
-	 * If the interrupt was enabled, enabled it again. Otherwise,
-	 * just wait for the distributor to have digested our changes.
-	 */
+	/* If the interrupt was enabled, enabled it again. */
 	if (enabled)
 		gic_unmask_irq(d);
-	else
-		gic_dist_wait_for_rwp();
 
 	irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
 
-- 
1.8.3.1



_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

             reply	other threads:[~2019-05-13  4:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-13  4:15 Zenghui Yu [this message]
2019-05-13  4:15 ` [RFC PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Correct the usage of GICD_CTLR's RWP field Zenghui Yu
2019-05-13  8:37 ` Andre Przywara
2019-05-13  8:37   ` Andre Przywara
2019-05-13 11:55   ` Zenghui Yu
2019-05-13 11:55     ` Zenghui Yu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1557720954-6592-1-git-send-email-yuzenghui@huawei.com \
    --to=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
    --cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
    --cc=drjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.