mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Burton <paul.burton@imgtec.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>,
	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>,
	Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
	"Max Filippov" <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	Matt Redfearn <matt.redfearn@imgtec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] irqchip/mips-gic: Report that effective affinity is a single target
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 09:48:25 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8369006.oQ7XfiVv7q@np-p-burton> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d46ab22-dc61-b332-4c98-e6a8bb1921a7@arm.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3450 bytes --]

Hi Marc,

On Tuesday, 15 August 2017 09:44:24 PDT Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 15/08/17 17:23, Paul Burton wrote:
> > Hi Marc,
> > 
> > On Tuesday, 15 August 2017 04:34:46 PDT Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> The MIPS GIC driver only targets a single CPU at a time, even if
> >> the notional affinity is wider. Let's inform the core code
> >> about this.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> >> ---
> >> 
> >>  drivers/irqchip/Kconfig        | 1 +
> >>  drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c | 2 ++
> >>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> >> index 39bfa5b25b54..bca9a88012f0 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> >> @@ -141,6 +141,7 @@ config IRQ_MIPS_CPU
> >> 
> >>  	select GENERIC_IRQ_IPI if SYS_SUPPORTS_MULTITHREADING
> >>  	select IRQ_DOMAIN
> >>  	select IRQ_DOMAIN_HIERARCHY if GENERIC_IRQ_IPI
> >> 
> >> +	select GENERIC_IRQ_EFFECTIVE_AFF_MASK
> >> 
> >>  config CLPS711X_IRQCHIP
> >>  
> >>  	bool
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
> >> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c index 6ab1d3afec02..e075cb25fad6 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
> >> @@ -463,6 +463,7 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const
> >> struct cpumask *cpumask, set_bit(irq,
> >> pcpu_masks[cpumask_first(&tmp)].pcpu_mask);
> >> 
> >>  	cpumask_copy(irq_data_get_affinity_mask(d), cpumask);
> >> 
> >> +	irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask);
> > 
> > This doesn't seem right - it's just setting the effective affinity to the
> > same as affinity, not taking into account CPU restrictions at all. I
> > think this> 
> > should be:
> >   irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpumask_first(&tmp)));
> > 
> > (or something cleaner but to that effect)
> 
> Gah, you're absolutely right (/me plugs brain back in). How about something
> like this:
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
> index e075cb25fad6..6461380ff1a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
> @@ -445,25 +445,27 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const
> struct cpumask *cpumask, unsigned int irq = GIC_HWIRQ_TO_SHARED(d->hwirq);
>  	cpumask_t	tmp = CPU_MASK_NONE;
>  	unsigned long	flags;
> -	int		i;
> +	int		i, cpu;
> 
>  	cpumask_and(&tmp, cpumask, cpu_online_mask);
>  	if (cpumask_empty(&tmp))
>  		return -EINVAL;
> 
> +	cpu = cpumask_first(&tmp);
> +
>  	/* Assumption : cpumask refers to a single CPU */
>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&gic_lock, flags);
> 
>  	/* Re-route this IRQ */
> -	gic_map_to_vpe(irq, mips_cm_vp_id(cpumask_first(&tmp)));
> +	gic_map_to_vpe(irq, mips_cm_vp_id(cpu));
> 
>  	/* Update the pcpu_masks */
>  	for (i = 0; i < min(gic_vpes, NR_CPUS); i++)
>  		clear_bit(irq, pcpu_masks[i].pcpu_mask);
> -	set_bit(irq, pcpu_masks[cpumask_first(&tmp)].pcpu_mask);
> +	set_bit(irq, pcpu_masks[cpu].pcpu_mask);
> 
>  	cpumask_copy(irq_data_get_affinity_mask(d), cpumask);
> -	irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask);
> +	irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gic_lock, flags);
> 
>  	return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_NOCOPY;
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.

That looks better (though patch 37 of my "irqchip: mips-gic: Cleanup & 
optimisation" series would get you that cpu variable already ;) ).

Thanks,
    Paul

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-15 16:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-15 11:34 [PATCH 00/12] genirq/irqchip: Effective affinity fixups Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 01/12] genirq: Restrict effective affinity to single-target interrupts Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 12:01   ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-08-15 12:18     ` Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 02/12] genirq/proc: Use the the accessor to report the effective affinity Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 03/12] irqchip/gic: Report that effective affinity is a single target Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 04/12] irqchip/gic-v3: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 05/12] irqchip/gic-v3-its: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 06/12] irqchip/armada-370-xp: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 07/12] irqchip/bcm-6345-l1: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 08/12] irqchip/bcm-7038-l1: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 09/12] irqchip/metag-ext: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 10/12] irqchip/hip04: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 11/12] irqchip/mips-gic: " Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 16:23   ` Paul Burton
2017-08-15 16:44     ` Marc Zyngier
2017-08-15 16:48       ` Paul Burton [this message]
2017-08-15 11:34 ` [PATCH 12/12] irqchip/xtensa-mx: " Marc Zyngier

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=8369006.oQ7XfiVv7q@np-p-burton \
    --to=paul.burton@imgtec.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=cernekee@gmail.com \
    --cc=chris@zankel.net \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
    --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
    --cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=matt.redfearn@imgtec.com \
    --cc=sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=xuwei5@hisilicon.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®