From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 17/22] xen/arm: ITS: Initialize physical
 ITS
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:00:45 -0700
Message-ID: <55D22F5D.5000901@citrix.com>
References: <1437995524-19772-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
	<1437995524-19772-18-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1437995524-19772-18-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: vijay.kilari@gmail.com, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, tim@xen.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Cc: Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, manish.jaggi@caviumnetworks.com, Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@caviumnetworks.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Vijay,

On 27/07/2015 04:11, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@caviumnetworks.com>
>
> Initialize physical ITS driver from GIC v3 driver
> if LPIs are supported by hardware
>
> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@caviumnetworks.com>
> ---
> v5: Made check of its dt node availability before
>      setting lpi_supported flag
> ---
>   xen/arch/arm/gic-v3.c |   19 +++++++++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3.c
> index 8c7c5cf..23eb47c 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3.c
> @@ -714,6 +714,10 @@ static int __cpuinit gicv3_cpu_init(void)
>       if ( gicv3_enable_redist() )
>           return -ENODEV;
>
> +        /* Give LPIs a spin */
> +    if ( gicv3_info.lpi_supported )
> +        its_cpu_init();
> +
>       /* Set priority on PPI and SGI interrupts */
>       priority = (GIC_PRI_IPI << 24 | GIC_PRI_IPI << 16 | GIC_PRI_IPI << 8 |
>                   GIC_PRI_IPI);
> @@ -1323,11 +1327,18 @@ static int __init gicv3_init(void)
>
>       if ( gicv3_dist_supports_lpis() )
>       {
> -        gicv3_info.lpi_supported = 1;
> -        gicv3_info.nr_event_ids = its_get_nr_event_ids();
> +        /*
> +         * LPI support is enabled only if HW supports it and
> +         * ITS dt node is available
> +         */
> +        if ( !its_init(&gicv3.rdist_data) )
> +        {
> +            gicv3_info.lpi_supported = 1;
> +            gicv3_info.nr_event_ids = its_get_nr_event_ids();
> +        }
> +        else
> +            gicv3_info.lpi_supported = 0;

I think this is wrong to use LPI supported to know whether ITS is 
present or not.

AFAICT, most the usage of lpi_supported is only for vgic where you 
should have a proper field in the vgic structure rather than using this 
field.

For the rest, we may want to support LPIs without ITS at some point. So 
we should keep 2 distincts field for this purpose. Although, I believe 
that we can drop most of them.

>       }
> -    else
> -        gicv3_info.lpi_supported = 0;

Why did you drop the else? It was valid...

>
>       gicv3_dist_init();
>       res = gicv3_cpu_init();
>

Regards,


-- 
Julien Grall