Re: [Xen-devel] Size of irq field

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

(CC Stefano and Ian)

On 02/04/2015 16:05, Iurii Konovalenko wrote:
> Hi, Julien!
Hello Iurii,

> During bringing up Xen on Renesas Lager board we faced with problem.
> A lot of Xen sources relies on statement, that IRQ number is less then
> 256 and variables, parameters, fields etc. are of type uint8_t. But we
> can have IRQs, that are greater then 255, for example on RCar H2 SoC.
> Also, as I saw from one of your latest commits, GICv supports 1020
> physical interrupts. As a result, overflow can occur. So it seems
> logical to increase all irq staff to uint16_t or uint32_t. We have
> local patches for increasing some structures, functions etc.
> But before pushing these patches I want to know your opinion, what do
> you think about this problem? What type should we use uint16_t or
> uint32_t? How to find all places where uint8_t type is used for IRQ?
I'm a bit surprised. I looked through the hypervisor and libxl and I was 
able to found only one place (DOMCTL_irq_permission which is not really 
supported on ARM). We are usually using uint32_t/int for IRQ.
Can you give an example of files/structures using uint8_t for IRQ?

Ideally the IRQ should use uint32_t. This is allow us to support LPIs 
(IRQ number start a 8192 up to a very high number).
> Best regards.
Regards,

--
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel