On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 17:32 +0800, Ryder Lee wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 10:02 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:41 AM, Ryder Lee <ryder....@mediatek.com> wrote:
> > > A root complex usually consist of a host bridge and multiple P2P bridges,
> > > and someone may express that in the form of a root node with many subnodes
> > > and list all four interrupts for each slot (child node) in the root node
> > > like this:
> > >
> > > pcie-controller {
> > > ...
> > > interrupt-map-mask = <0xf800 0 0 7>;
> > > interrupt-map = <0x0000 0 0 {INTx} &{interrupt parent}
> > > ...>
> > > 0x0800 0 0 {INTx} &{interrupt parent}
> > > ...>;
> > >
> > > pcie@0,0 {
> > > reg = <0x0000 0 0 0 0>;
> > > ...
> > > };
> > >
> > > pcie@1,0 {
> > > reg = <0x0800 0 0 0 0>;
> > > ...
> > > };
> > > };
> > >
> > > As shown above, we'd like to propagate IRQs from a root port to the
> > > devices
> > > in the hierarchy below it in this way. However, it seems that the current
> > > parser couldn't handle such cases and will get something unexpected below:
> > >
> > > pcieport 0000:00:01.0: assign IRQ: got 213
> > > igb 0000:01:00.0: assign IRQ: got 212
> > >
> > > There is a device which is connected to 2nd slot, but the port doesn't
> > > share
> > > the same IRQ with its downstream devices. The problem here is that, if
> > > the
> > > loop found a P2P bridge, it wouldn't check whether the reg property exists
> > > in ppnode or not but just pass the subordinate devfn to
> > > of_irq_parse_raw(),
> > > thus the subsequent flow couldn't correctly resolve them.
I don't really understand the problem explanation here. Something
doesn't look right as you shouldn't have to change that function, but I
just don't get what you a
Cheers,
Ben.
