[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v1 09/14] xen/riscv: aplic_init() implementation
On 4/14/25 12:04 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.04.2025 17:57, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:--- a/xen/arch/riscv/aplic.c +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/aplic.c @@ -9,19 +9,112 @@ * Copyright (c) 2024-2025 Vates */ +#include <xen/device_tree.h> #include <xen/errno.h> #include <xen/init.h> #include <xen/irq.h> +#include <xen/mm.h> #include <xen/sections.h> #include <xen/types.h> +#include <xen/vmap.h> +#include <asm/aplic.h> #include <asm/device.h> +#include <asm/imsic.h> #include <asm/intc.h> +#include <asm/riscv_encoding.h> + +#define APLIC_DEFAULT_PRIORITY 1 + +static struct aplic_priv aplic; static struct intc_info __ro_after_init aplic_info = { .hw_version = INTC_APLIC, }; +static void __init aplic_init_hw_interrupts(void) +{ + int i; + + /* Disable all interrupts */ + for ( i = 0; i <= aplic_info.nr_irqs; i += 32 ) + aplic.regs->clrie[i] = -1U; + + /* Set interrupt type and default priority for all interrupts */ + for ( i = 1; i <= aplic_info.nr_irqs; i++ ) + { + aplic.regs->sourcecfg[i - 1] = 0; + aplic.regs->target[i - 1] = APLIC_DEFAULT_PRIORITY;A field named "target" is written with a priority value? Low bits of target register contains Interrupt Priority bits which can't be zero according to AIA spec: ``` 4.5.16.1. Active source, direct delivery mode For an active interrupt source , if the domain is configured in direct delivery mode (domaincfg.DM = 0), then register target[ ] has this format: bits 31:18 Hart Index (WLRL) bits 7:0 IPRIO (WARL) All other register bits are reserved and read as zeros. Hart Index is a WLRL field that specifies the hart to which interrupts from this source will be delivered. Field IPRIO (Interrupt Priority) specifies the priority number for the interrupt source. This field is a WARL unsigned integer of IPRIOLEN bits, where IPRIOLEN is a constant parameter for the given APLIC, in the range of 1 to 8. Only values 1 through are allowed for IPRIO, not zero. A write to a target register sets IPRIO equal to bits :0 of the 32-bit value written, unless those bits are all zeros, in which case the priority number is set to 1 instead. (If IPRIOLEN = 1, these rules cause IPRIO to be effectively read-only with value 1.) ``` + } + + /* Clear APLIC domaincfg */ + aplic.regs->domaincfg = APLIC_DOMAINCFG_IE | APLIC_DOMAINCFG_DM;The statement doesn't like like there was any "clearing" here. But all other bits, except
+ rc = dt_property_read_u32(node, "msi-parent", &imsic_phandle); + if ( !rc ) + panic("%s: IDC mode not supported\n", node->full_name); + + imsic_node = dt_find_node_by_phandle(imsic_phandle); + if ( !imsic_node ) + panic("%s: unable to find IMSIC node\n", node->full_name); + + /* check imsic mode */ + rc = dt_property_read_u32_array(imsic_node, "interrupts-extended", + irq_range, ARRAY_SIZE(irq_range)); + if ( rc && (rc != -EOVERFLOW) ) + panic("%s: unable to find interrupt-extended in %s node\n", + node->full_name, imsic_node->full_name);Why exactly is EOVERFLOW tolerable here? QEMU generates two IMSIC device tree nodes: one for M-mode and one for S-mode. For the hypervisor, we don’t really care about the M-mode IMSIC node — we're only interested in the S-mode IMSIC node. The IMSIC node includes this information in the For our purposes, to determine whether the IMSIC node corresponds to M-mode or not, it’s sufficient to read only the first pair and check the mode like this: if ( irq_range[1] == IRQ_M_EXT ) Thereby dt_property_read_u32_array() will return -EOVERFLOW in the case when a platfrom has more then one CPU as we passed irq_range[2] as an argument but the amount of values in "interrupts-extended" property will be (2 * CPUS_NUM). I can update the comment above dt_property_read_u32_array() for more clearness. + if ( irq_range[1] == IRQ_M_EXT ) + /* machine mode imsic node, ignore this aplic node */ + return 0; + + rc = imsic_init(imsic_node); + if ( rc ) + panic("%s: Failded to initialize IMSIC\n", node->full_name); + + /* Find out number of interrupt sources */ + rc = dt_property_read_u32(node, "riscv,num-sources", &aplic_info.nr_irqs); + if ( !rc ) + panic("%s: failed to get number of interrupt sources\n", + node->full_name); + + prop = dt_get_property(node, "reg", NULL); + dt_get_range(&prop, node, &paddr, &size); + if ( !paddr ) + panic("%s: first MMIO resource not found\n", node->full_name); + + aplic.paddr_start = paddr; + aplic.paddr_end = paddr + size; + aplic.size = size;Why do all three need recording? Isn't a (start,size) tuple sufficient (and unambiguous)? (start,size) will be enough. I'll drop aplic.paddr_end. + aplic.regs = ioremap(paddr, size); + if ( !aplic.regs ) + panic("%s: unable to map\n", node->full_name); + + /* Setup initial state APLIC interrupts */ + aplic_init_hw_interrupts(); + + return 0; +} + +static const struct intc_hw_operations __ro_after_init aplic_ops = {const or __ro_after_init? What’s wrong with using both? Probably, --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/include/asm/aplic.h @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT */ + +/* + * xen/arch/riscv/aplic.h + * + * RISC-V Advanced Platform-Level Interrupt Controller support + * + * Copyright (c) 2023 Microchip. + */ + +#ifndef ASM__RISCV__APLIC_H +#define ASM__RISCV__APLIC_H + +#include <xen/types.h> + +#include <asm/imsic.h> + +#define APLIC_DOMAINCFG_IE BIT(8, UL) +#define APLIC_DOMAINCFG_DM BIT(2, UL) + +struct aplic_regs { + uint32_t domaincfg; + uint32_t sourcecfg[1023]; + uint8_t _reserved1[0xBC0]; + + uint32_t mmsiaddrcfg; + uint32_t mmsiaddrcfgh; + uint32_t smsiaddrcfg; + uint32_t smsiaddrcfgh; + uint8_t _reserved2[0x30]; + + uint32_t setip[32]; + uint8_t _reserved3[92]; + + uint32_t setipnum; + uint8_t _reserved4[0x20]; + + uint32_t in_clrip[32]; + uint8_t _reserved5[92]; + + uint32_t clripnum; + uint8_t _reserved6[32]; + + uint32_t setie[32]; + uint8_t _reserved7[92]; + + uint32_t setienum; + uint8_t _reserved8[32]; + + uint32_t clrie[32]; + uint8_t _reserved9[92]; + + uint32_t clrienum; + uint8_t _reserved10[32]; + + uint32_t setipnum_le; + uint32_t setipnum_be; + uint8_t _reserved11[4088]; + + uint32_t genmsi; + uint32_t target[1023]; +}; + +struct aplic_priv { + /* base physical address and size */ + paddr_t paddr_start; + paddr_t paddr_end; + size_t size; + + /* registers */ + volatile struct aplic_regs *regs; + + /* imsic configuration */ + const struct imsic_config *imsic_cfg; +}; + +#endif /* ASM__RISCV__APLIC_H */Does all of this really need to live in a non-private header? struct aplic_priv is used in different files: - in aplic.c to define `aplic` variable. - in vaplic.c (which isn't intoduced yet) is used in several places: https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/olkur/xen/-/blob/latest/xen/arch/riscv/vaplic.c#L41 struct aplic_regs is used only in aplic.c (at least, at the moment) so could be moved to aplic.c, but I don't see too much sense. --- a/xen/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h @@ -27,7 +27,6 @@ #define IRQ_TYPE_INVALID DT_IRQ_TYPE_INVALID /* TODO */ -#define nr_irqs 0UHow come this is simply no longer needed, i.e. without any replacement? Hmm, looks like the only use in common code has gone away. Yet then this still doesn't really look to belong here (especially if not mentioned in the description). I missed that it is used in xen/common/domain.c when CONFIG_HAS_PIRQ=y, but this config isn't selected for RISC-V. I think that I have to revert this change. ~ Oleksii
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |