Re: git: 85918beb387f - main - intrng: Add support for multiple interrupt roots

From: Ayrton Munoz <a.munoz3327_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:34:58 UTC
Warner and mmel just got to the PR before I got a chance to address a
few tiny nits but what got committed is fine with me. Thanks for
double checking Mark!


On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 2:19 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2024, 7:01 PM Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Warner Losh <imp_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote on
>> Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2024 13:19:21 UTC :
>>
>> > The branch main has been updated by imp:
>> >
>> > URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=85918beb387f179abc93a6c613801fb9761ff1e2
>> >
>> > commit 85918beb387f179abc93a6c613801fb9761ff1e2
>> > Author: Ayrton Munoz <a.munoz3327@gmail.com>
>> > AuthorDate: 2024-07-21 18:10:20 +0000
>> > Commit: Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org>
>> > CommitDate: 2024-09-22 13:18:34 +0000
>> >
>> > intrng: Add support for multiple interrupt roots
>> >
>> > Different types of interrupts may require using different exception
>> > vectors so this commit adds support multiple interrupt roots to handle
>> > these cases. Archs may opt-in to multiple interrupt roots by defining
>> > INTR_ROOT_NUM as the number of roots in their intr.h. Based off
>> > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D40161.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Ayrton Munoz <a.munoz3327@gmail.com>
>> > Co-authored-by: Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org>
>> > Co-authored-by: Andrew Turner <andrew@FreeBSD.org>
>> > Reviewed-by: imp,mmel,mhorne
>> > Pull-Request: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/1363
>> . . .
>> > +/*
>> > + * Archs may define multiple roots with INTR_ROOT_NUM to support different kinds
>> > + * of interrupts (e.g. arm64 FIQs which use a different exception vector than
>> > + * IRQs).
>> > + */
>> > +#if !defined(INTR_ROOT_NUM)
>> > +#define INTR_ROOT_NUM 1
>> > +#endif
>> > +
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> When I was reading the:
>>
>> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/1363
>>
>> conversation I saw:
>>
>> -#define INTR_ROOT_NUM 2
>> +#define INTR_ROOT_COUNT 2
>>
>> and related discussion with 2 thumbs up, including one by ayrtonm.
>>
>> A similar point goes for:
>>
>> -void *arg, uint32_t rootnum)
>> +void *arg, uint32_t roottype)
>>
>> with another ayrtonm thumbs up at the end. (I've not checked
>> if there are more distinctions.)
>>
>> Such leaves me wondering if what was committed was actually
>> the final intended code: Is it?
>
>
> I thought it was... If we need a fllowup, i can do that...
>
> Warner
>
>> ===
>> Mark Millard
>> marklmi at yahoo.com
>>