Received: by 2002:ac0:8c9a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id r26csp504545ima; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 06:40:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ia6jIWhlrqDWmF8WDN51pmWMw4DLDWO1R1hLrUEfUxJ9NJoy3pw/2z7MUQ8D721uUmYgM6o X-Received: by 2002:a63:8c6:: with SMTP id 189mr2547441pgi.322.1549032012651; Fri, 01 Feb 2019 06:40:12 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549032012; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=oVK6WYvxRHLblCALUAvy3BUCxWiXPkbXuXCtEuThYWhACwcuZRyaovPYElORpPipzy QWrOn+sglKYOtDXOqBKeArXiSrwtQM70OTJRE5yU+bXpnXKnrRYo2H9CHdhXSDBFCIZw 01YEECCImmBJBU2PQdS3ORwaNk096SQAaq6IeCXG7fbj2lRAdCKUOy5I22491zTPHP3d lOHXgLVkSBWjfh11pKj6BesO+vNVkT18UjmTY0T1MEIs4ctPSqpMyx4QKH8kAx6+rsVu 56whyNCMvspLuMY8R9C96a1bWej2UWQhBv5V1WBgVGqgZ3m0uwd1GAR0QlAOCQcXayzt jT8Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=oJrh/lioRyrkkBzw0wI2ujYuZeI3iAXvsHEMymOsDWM=; b=XOCPiC/gUQrOQidlMwpmlQMPuXLTbaxu+0E4GFi4hIms881f4pwFMdhJyISEAzIqGF hT/9uSHE9BCnKEsA0HX0cWa25BWpqvb9C64+pe97F1oqQWofGGuE2ffxot9nV/wZvl0e wr4mSbf44HlVsP4PERstZzuo+p3ze2RpjMlQZ4kUsm9Q4fMOvR8Hueby9tpK1NpFgGnN WDhrggNL7fEnGG0CdHbYKUQs2CKPU3fe+U3aXQW6HCS9hWMKPOeG7DyXF5iKL6IXEqCY O66sXDR+VFTypou9G/Jda6/cuaIoTDixoxYr0schdOhaUlPllTQspgyYX+6JikjbWRHI K1YQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 7si9003098pfb.226.2019.02.01.06.39.57; Fri, 01 Feb 2019 06:40:12 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727742AbfBAOha convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 1 Feb 2019 09:37:30 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:50824 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726282AbfBAOha (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2019 09:37:30 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76127ABEC; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 14:37:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 15:37:26 +0100 From: Thomas Bogendoerfer To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , James Hogan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Lorenzo Pieralisi , Paul Burton , Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] MIPS: SGI-IP27: abstract chipset irq from bridge Message-Id: <20190201153726.e3ce44c4a3fb22f5f5d6bcf3@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20190128162721.GA25378@infradead.org> References: <20190124174728.28812-1-tbogendoerfer@suse.de> <20190124174728.28812-8-tbogendoerfer@suse.de> <20190128133317.GD744@infradead.org> <20190128150135.66f85834ab80813e6dc5ddf5@suse.de> <20190128162721.GA25378@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 08:27:21 -0800 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 03:01:35PM +0100, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 05:33:17 -0800 > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > Shouldnt this just use chained irqchip drivers instead? > > > > you mean using irq_set_chained_handler() ? If yes, this IMHO doesn't look usefull > > because it's used for adding a secondary interrupt controller. But what I need > > is telling bridge ASIC to direct the xtalk IRQ packet to a specific HUB/HEART/BEDROCK > > from the HUB/HEART/BEDROCK specific code. And want to avoid dragging in bridge details > > to that specific code. > > Yes, but don't we have nested interrupt controllers here? Even if they > don't really do much in the fast path the setup does look chained to me. > Then again I'm not really an expert in the irq handling code nor in this > hardware, so maybe Thomas or Marc might have a better idea. found a presentation from Marc and what I need here is irqdomain hierarchy. Which meana converting the whole hub irq code to irqdomain first. Let's see how easy this will be:-) Thomas. -- SUSE Linux GmbH GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)