Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754082AbaJWBSH (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:18:07 -0400 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.64]:17445 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750941AbaJWBSE (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:18:04 -0400 Message-ID: <5448571F.6030105@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 09:17:19 +0800 From: Yijing Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bjorn Helgaas CC: , , Xinwei Hu , Wuyun , , Russell King , , , , , Arnd Bergmann , Thomas Gleixner , "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" , , Joerg Roedel , , , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , , , Sebastian Ott , "Tony Luck" , , "David S. Miller" , , Chris Metcalf , Ralf Baechle , Lucas Stach , David Vrabel , "Sergei Shtylyov" , Michael Ellerman , Thierry Reding , "Thomas Petazzoni" , Liviu Dudau Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 24/27] IA64/MSI: Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X irq References: <1413342435-7876-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1413342435-7876-25-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20141022235345.GE4795@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20141022235345.GE4795@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.27.212] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014/10/23 7:53, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:07:12AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: >> Use MSI chip framework instead of arch MSI functions to configure >> MSI/MSI-X irq. So we can manage MSI/MSI-X irq in a unified framework. > > This needs slightly more detail. You're using the MSI chip framework > "instead of arch MSI functions". Well, there are still arch-specific > functions, i.e., arch_ia64_setup_msi_irq() and > arch_ia64_teardown_msi_irq(). > > We used to have arch_setup_msi_irq() which had a weak default > implementation, and a strong arch-specific implementation here, and you're > replacing that model with the new "msi-ops" model. I don't know how you > want to write that, but it's not that you're getting rid of the > arch-specific code; you're keeping arch-specific code but structuring it > differently. Hm, I will rename the msi-ops functions. > >> Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang >> --- >> arch/ia64/include/asm/pci.h | 10 ++++++++++ >> arch/ia64/kernel/msi_ia64.c | 14 ++++++++++---- >> arch/ia64/pci/pci.c | 1 + >> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/pci.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/pci.h >> index 52af5ed..907dcba 100644 >> --- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/pci.h >> +++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/pci.h >> @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ struct pci_controller { >> int segment; >> int node; /* nearest node with memory or NUMA_NO_NODE for global allocation */ >> >> + struct msi_chip *msi_chip; >> void *platform_data; >> }; >> >> @@ -101,6 +102,15 @@ struct pci_controller { >> #define PCI_CONTROLLER(busdev) ((struct pci_controller *) busdev->sysdata) >> #define pci_domain_nr(busdev) (PCI_CONTROLLER(busdev)->segment) >> >> +extern struct msi_chip chip; > > Please make this name more descriptive. "chip" is way too generic for a > global name. OK, what about rename it to ia64_msi_chip, and rename the original static irq_chip ia64_msi_chip to static irq_chip msi_chip like in x86. > >> +static inline struct msi_chip *pci_msi_chip(struct pci_bus *bus) >> +{ >> + struct pci_controller *ctrl = bus->sysdata; >> + >> + return ctrl->msi_chip; >> +} >> + >> extern struct pci_ops pci_root_ops; >> >> static inline int pci_proc_domain(struct pci_bus *bus) >> diff --git a/arch/ia64/kernel/msi_ia64.c b/arch/ia64/kernel/msi_ia64.c >> index 8c3730c..401fc98 100644 >> --- a/arch/ia64/kernel/msi_ia64.c >> +++ b/arch/ia64/kernel/msi_ia64.c >> @@ -112,15 +112,16 @@ static struct irq_chip ia64_msi_chip = { >> }; >> >> >> -int arch_setup_msi_irq(struct pci_dev *pdev, struct msi_desc *desc) >> +static int arch_ia64_setup_msi_irq(struct msi_chip *chip, >> + struct pci_dev *dev, struct msi_desc *desc) >> { >> if (platform_setup_msi_irq) >> - return platform_setup_msi_irq(pdev, desc); >> + return platform_setup_msi_irq(dev, desc); >> >> - return ia64_setup_msi_irq(pdev, desc); >> + return ia64_setup_msi_irq(dev, desc); > > Please don't make gratuitous changes ("pdev" -> "dev") at the same time, > especially since the rest of the file still uses "pdev". OK. > >> } >> >> -void arch_teardown_msi_irq(unsigned int irq) >> +static void arch_ia64_teardown_msi_irq(struct msi_chip *chip, unsigned int irq) >> { >> if (platform_teardown_msi_irq) >> return platform_teardown_msi_irq(irq); >> @@ -128,6 +129,11 @@ void arch_teardown_msi_irq(unsigned int irq) >> return ia64_teardown_msi_irq(irq); >> } >> >> +struct msi_chip chip = { >> + .setup_irq = arch_ia64_setup_msi_irq, >> + .teardown_irq = arch_ia64_teardown_msi_irq, >> +}; >> + >> #ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU >> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP >> static int dmar_msi_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data, >> diff --git a/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c b/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c >> index 291a582..299b67d 100644 >> --- a/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c >> +++ b/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c >> @@ -437,6 +437,7 @@ struct pci_bus *pci_acpi_scan_root(struct acpi_pci_root *root) >> >> controller->companion = device; >> controller->node = acpi_get_node(device->handle); >> + controller->msi_chip = &chip; >> >> info = kzalloc(sizeof(*info), GFP_KERNEL); >> if (!info) { >> -- >> 1.7.1 >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > . > -- Thanks! Yijing -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/