On 24/06/20 20:57, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> @@ -958,9 +958,76 @@ void handle_IPI(int ipinr, struct pt_regs *regs)
>
> if ((unsigned)ipinr < NR_IPI)
> trace_ipi_exit_rcuidle(ipi_types[ipinr]);
> +}
> +
> +/* Legacy version, should go away once all irqchips have been converted */
> +void handle_IPI(int ipinr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + struct pt_regs *old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
> +
> + irq_enter();
> + do_handle_IPI(ipinr);
> + irq_exit();
> +
> set_irq_regs(old_regs);
> }
>
> +static irqreturn_t ipi_handler(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> + do_handle_IPI(irq - ipi_irq_base);
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> +static void ipi_send(const struct cpumask *target, unsigned int ipi)
> +{
> + __ipi_send_mask(ipi_desc[ipi], target);
> +}
> +
> +static void ipi_setup(int cpu)
> +{
> + if (ipi_irq_base) {
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_ipi; i++)
> + enable_percpu_irq(ipi_irq_base + i, 0);
> + }
> +}
Nit: Once we have the irqchip changes in, should we warn & bail out when
!ipi_irq_base? Ditto for the teardown
> +
> +static void ipi_teardown(int cpu)
> +{
> + if (ipi_irq_base) {
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_ipi; i++)
> + disable_percpu_irq(ipi_irq_base + i);
> + }
> +}
