Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752216AbdGUHHv (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 03:07:51 -0400 Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([95.129.55.99]:44204 "EHLO gloria.sntech.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751810AbdGUHHu (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 03:07:50 -0400 From: Heiko Stuebner To: Simon Xue Cc: Joerg Roedel , linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] iommu/rockchip: add multi irqs support Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:07:42 +0200 Message-ID: <5666211.VjCXUuunyU@phil> User-Agent: KMail/5.2.3 (Linux/4.9.0-2-amd64; KDE/5.28.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1500618430-114821-2-git-send-email-xxm@rock-chips.com> References: <1500618430-114821-1-git-send-email-xxm@rock-chips.com> <1500618430-114821-2-git-send-email-xxm@rock-chips.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2900 Lines: 92 Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2017, 14:27:09 CEST schrieb Simon Xue: > From: Simon > > RK3368 vpu mmu have two irqs, this patch support multi irqs > > Signed-off-by: Simon > --- > changes since V1: > - use devm_kcalloc instead of devm_kzalloc when alloc irq array > > drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c > index 4ba48a2..3c462c0 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c > @@ -90,7 +90,8 @@ struct rk_iommu { > struct device *dev; > void __iomem **bases; > int num_mmu; > - int irq; > + int *irq; > + int num_irq; > struct iommu_device iommu; > struct list_head node; /* entry in rk_iommu_domain.iommus */ > struct iommu_domain *domain; /* domain to which iommu is attached */ > @@ -825,10 +826,12 @@ static int rk_iommu_attach_device(struct iommu_domain *domain, > > iommu->domain = domain; > > - ret = devm_request_irq(iommu->dev, iommu->irq, rk_iommu_irq, > - IRQF_SHARED, dev_name(dev), iommu); > - if (ret) > - return ret; > + for (i = 0; i < iommu->num_irq; i++) { > + ret = devm_request_irq(iommu->dev, iommu->irq[i], rk_iommu_irq, > + IRQF_SHARED, dev_name(dev), iommu); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + } > > for (i = 0; i < iommu->num_mmu; i++) { > rk_iommu_write(iommu->bases[i], RK_MMU_DTE_ADDR, > @@ -878,7 +881,8 @@ static void rk_iommu_detach_device(struct iommu_domain *domain, > } > rk_iommu_disable_stall(iommu); > > - devm_free_irq(iommu->dev, iommu->irq, iommu); > + for (i = 0; i < iommu->num_irq; i++) > + devm_free_irq(iommu->dev, iommu->irq[i], iommu); > > iommu->domain = NULL; > > @@ -1157,10 +1161,20 @@ static int rk_iommu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (iommu->num_mmu == 0) > return PTR_ERR(iommu->bases[0]); > > - iommu->irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0); > - if (iommu->irq < 0) { > - dev_err(dev, "Failed to get IRQ, %d\n", iommu->irq); > - return -ENXIO; > + while (platform_get_irq(pdev, iommu->num_irq) >= 0) > + iommu->num_irq++; Hmm, this could also result in a iommu having 0 irqs if wrongly configured and probe would still suceed. This sounds somehow wrong to me. But I'm not sure if there is precedent on how to handle a variable number of interrupts correctly somewhere. Heiko > + > + iommu->irq = devm_kcalloc(dev, iommu->num_irq, sizeof(*iommu->irq), > + GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!iommu->irq) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + for (i = 0; i < iommu->num_irq; i++) { > + iommu->irq[i] = platform_get_irq(pdev, i); > + if (iommu->irq[i] < 0) { > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to get IRQ, %d\n", iommu->irq[i]); > + return -ENXIO; > + } > } > > err = iommu_device_sysfs_add(&iommu->iommu, dev, NULL, dev_name(dev)); >