[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 3/7] xen/arm: Make gic-v2 code handle hip04-d01 platform
On 11/03/2014 04:46 PM, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > The GIC in this platform is mainly compatible with the standard > GICv2 beside: > - ITARGET is extended to 16 bit to support 16 CPUs; > - SGI mask is extended to support 16 CPUs; > - maximum supported interrupt is 510. > > Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > xen/arch/arm/gic-v2.c | 89 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > xen/arch/arm/gic.c | 3 +- > xen/include/asm-arm/gic.h | 4 ++- > 3 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v2.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v2.c > index faad1ff..9461fe3 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v2.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v2.c > @@ -79,16 +79,23 @@ static struct gic_info gicv2_info; > * logical CPU numbering. Let's use mapping as returned by the GIC > * itself > */ > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u8, gic_cpu_id); > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u16, gic_cpu_id); > > /* Maximum cpu interface per GIC */ > -#define NR_GIC_CPU_IF 8 > +static unsigned int nr_gic_cpu_if = 8; > +static unsigned int gicd_sgi_target_shift = GICD_SGI_TARGET_SHIFT; > +static unsigned int gic_cpu_mask = 0xff; > > static inline void writeb_gicd(uint8_t val, unsigned int offset) > { > writeb_relaxed(val, gicv2.map_dbase + offset); > } > > +static inline void writew_gicd(uint16_t val, unsigned int offset) > +{ > + writew_relaxed(val, gicv2.map_dbase + offset); > +} > + > static inline void writel_gicd(uint32_t val, unsigned int offset) > { > writel_relaxed(val, gicv2.map_dbase + offset); > @@ -132,7 +139,7 @@ static unsigned int gicv2_cpu_mask(const cpumask_t > *cpumask) > cpumask_and(&possible_mask, cpumask, &cpu_possible_map); > for_each_cpu( cpu, &possible_mask ) > { > - ASSERT(cpu < NR_GIC_CPU_IF); > + ASSERT(cpu < nr_gic_cpu_if); > mask |= per_cpu(gic_cpu_id, cpu); > } > > @@ -203,6 +210,15 @@ static unsigned int gicv2_read_irq(void) > return (readl_gicc(GICC_IAR) & GICC_IA_IRQ); > } > > +/* Set target CPU mask (RAZ/WI on uniprocessor) */ > +static void gicv2_set_irq_mask(int irq, unsigned int mask) > +{ > + if ( nr_gic_cpu_if == 16 ) This check is very confusing, and even more in patch #5. Code executed under this check describes your platform and not a generic 16-CPU support (actually there is no spec for it). I would introduce a new boolean or hide this check in a macro. > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c > index 70d10d6..8050a65 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c > @@ -563,12 +563,13 @@ static void do_sgi(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, enum > gic_sgi sgi) > void gic_interrupt(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, int is_fiq) > { > unsigned int irq; > + unsigned int max_irq = gic_hw_ops->info->nr_lines; > > do { > /* Reading IRQ will ACK it */ > irq = gic_hw_ops->read_irq(); > > - if ( likely(irq >= 16 && irq < 1021) ) > + if ( likely(irq >= 16 && irq < max_irq) ) On the previous version I've asked that need to explain in the commit message why this change is valid. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |