MIME-Version: 1.0
Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 08:35:19 +0000
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc:     apatel@ventanamicro.com, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, marcan@marcan.st,
        sven@svenpeter.dev, alyssa@rosenzweig.io, atishp@atishpatra.org,
        Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@wdc.com>,
        anup@brainfault.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, asahi@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 0/9] RISC-V IPI Improvements
In-Reply-To: <mhng-a886c4b4-d748-420f-889b-76ada4f9a432@palmer-ri-x1c9>
References: <mhng-a886c4b4-d748-420f-889b-76ada4f9a432@palmer-ri-x1c9>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.13
Message-ID: <0a0d1a182cef674a8e70347b2ed6f67b@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-02-15 03:17, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Feb 2023 03:04:14 PST (-0800), Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 14:12:12 +0000,
>> Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This series aims to improve IPI support in Linux RISC-V in following 
>>> ways:
>>>  1) Treat IPIs as normal per-CPU interrupts instead of having custom 
>>> RISC-V
>>>     specific hooks. This also makes Linux RISC-V IPI support aligned 
>>> with
>>>     other architectures.
>>>  2) Remote TLB flushes and icache flushes should prefer local IPIs 
>>> instead
>>>     of SBI calls whenever we have specialized hardware (such as 
>>> RISC-V AIA
>>>     IMSIC and RISC-V SWI) which allows S-mode software to directly 
>>> inject
>>>     IPIs without any assistance from M-mode runtime firmware.
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> I'm queuing patches 3 and 9 via the irqchip tree as they are
>> standalone.
>> 
>> For the rest, I need an Ack from the riscv maintainers as they change
>> a large amount of arch-specific code, and the couple of irqchip
>> patches depend on these changes.
>> 
>> Palmer, Paul?
> 
> I haven't gotten time to give this a proper review, but I think we've
> got enough of a mess with our interrupt handling that it doesn't
> really matter so
> 
> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> 
> if you want to take it for this cycle that's fine with me, but I'm
> also fine holding off so it can have a while to bake in linux-next --
> there's no real rush for any of this, as there's no hardware yet.

Letting this sort of things simmering in -next is the way.

Now that the basic dependencies are on their way, I'd expect this to be
rebased on 6.3-rc1, and we can then put the whole thing in -next.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...