Message ID | 20140311201533.GF31835@obsidianresearch.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Delegated to: | Bjorn Helgaas |
Headers | show |
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 06:54:24AM -0800, Tim Harvey wrote: >> When an interrupt-map contains multiple entries an imap pointer arithmetic >> bug can cause only the first entry to be properly evaluated and causes >> the out_irq parameters to be incorrect depending on the #interrupt-cells >> and #address-cells of the parent interrupt controller. > > Tim, > > I took a bit closer look at this for you, and I suspect the root fix > is this: > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt > @@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ Example: > intc: interrupt-controller@fff11000 { > compatible = "arm,cortex-a9-gic"; > #interrupt-cells = <3>; > - #address-cells = <1>; > interrupt-controller; > reg = <0xfff11000 0x1000>, > <0xfff10100 0x100>; > (plus the corresponding purge from the .dt files) > > It looks like the implementation does follow the OF specification: > > Each mapping entry consists of a 3-tuple of (child-interrupt, > interrupt-parent, parent-interrupt). The number of cells for the > child-interrupt specifier is determined by the "#address-cells" and > "#interrupt-cells"property of this node. The number of cells for the > parent-interrupt value is determined by the "#address-cells"and > "#interrupt-cells"property values of this node's > interrupt-parent. Ok - I see I misunderstood the spec with regards to what the address-cells related to. > > So by specifying interrupt-cells = 3, address-cells = 1, the GIC is > requiring 4 DWs for its interrupt specifier. Agreed, and the interrupt mapping for the imx6 pcie host controller: interrupt-map = <0 0 0 1 &intc GIC_SPI 123 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <0 0 0 2 &intc GIC_SPI 122 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <0 0 0 3 &intc GIC_SPI 121 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <0 0 0 4 &intc GIC_SPI 120 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; has only 3 cells for the parent interrupt, and only 3 are needed so I suppose there is no 'address' necessary. > > I see no reason why it doesn't have an address-cells = 0 like other > interrupt controllers.. I agree, and I see that as well for other cortex-a9 gic interrupt controllers. > > Setting #address-cells to 0 in the GIC node should be functionally > equivalent to your patch below, since newaddrsize will == 0. yes, it does. I'll verify and post a followup patch tomorrow for the invalid dtsi's. Thanks for digging into this! Tim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt @@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ Example: intc: interrupt-controller@fff11000 { compatible = "arm,cortex-a9-gic"; #interrupt-cells = <3>; - #address-cells = <1>; interrupt-controller; reg = <0xfff11000 0x1000>, <0xfff10100 0x100>;