Re: [PATCH v5] drm/tyr: add Job IRQ handling

Daniel Almeida <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.rust-for-linux
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Laura, thanks for working on this! :)

> On 10 Aug 2026, at 05:11, Laura Nao <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Add a threaded IRQ wrapper for Tyr interrupt sources and use it to
> handle the firmware Job IRQ.
> 
> The Job IRQ reports requests from the CSF firmware, including global
> interface requests and CSG attention bits. Only the GLB bit is currently
> handled, as it will be used to check firmware readiness. CSG bits
> handling will be added at a later stage. Add a Job IRQ handler that
> masks the interrupt in the primary IRQ handler, processes pending raw
> status in the threaded handler, clears the handled bit, and reenables
> the mask before returning.
> Add a wait queue and a bool flag so the handler can signal firmware
> readiness when the GLB bit is set.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Daniel Almeida <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Almeida <[email protected]>
> Co-developed-by: Deborah Brouwer <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Deborah Brouwer <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Laura Nao <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes in v5:
> - Implement PinnedDrop on TyrIrq to clear the interrupt mask on teardown 
> - Link to v4: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> 
> Changes in v4:
> - Replaced c_str! with C-String in irq.rs
> - Moved clear_status() before handle() in handle_threaded(), to avoid 
>  losing events if hw re-asserts the bit while handle() is running.
> - Only unmask interrupt sources in job_irq_init() when the handler is 
>  correctly registered.
> - Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> 
> Changes in v3:
> - Propagated request_threaded_irq_by_name safety requirement up the
>  call chain, made TyrIrq::request() and job_irq_init() unsafe
> - Dropped CSG bits masking, added TODO comment to note this will be
>  handled at a later stage. Reworded commit message to reflect the
>  change.
> - Added documentation for TyrIrqTrait, TyrIrq, JobIrq and job_irq_init()
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - Dropped Wait custom type in favor of WaitQueue
> - Renamed JobIrq lifetime to generic 'a

Why?

> 
> This patch follows up to [1], which adds support for firmware loading
> and MCU booting to the Tyr driver. The changes included here were
> originally introduced in its v4[2], then dropped to reduce the scope of
> the series, and have been adjusted to work with the HRT (Higher-Ranked
> Lifetime Types) driver architecture recently introduced.
> 
> The patch adds a threaded IRQ wrapper for the firmware Job interrupts,
> used to signal events from the global CSF (GLB) and Command Stream Group
> (CSG) interfaces.
> 
> These changes will be later used to wait for global CSF interface
> readiness after firmware boot, as part of the CSF firmware interfaces
> support that will be submitted as a separate series.
> 
> This patch is based on drm-rust-next and depends on:
> - [PATCH v2] rust: irq: make Registration compatible with lifetime-bound drivers[3]
> - [PATCH 0/5] rust: sync: add WaitQueue infrastructure[4]
> 
> Note: [4] doesn't apply cleanly on drm-rust-next at the moment, due to
> missing changes in rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs[5]. I've applied
> all dependencies and fixed conflicts for the purpose of testing this
> patch on top of drm-rust-next, a branch with these changes is available
> here: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/laura.nao/linux/-/commits/b4/tyr-irq-v5
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ 
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/
> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/driver.rs | 108 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw.rs     |   1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw/irq.rs | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 221 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/driver.rs b/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/driver.rs
> index d78ad9d292ff..495cc3baa98c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/driver.rs
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/driver.rs
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 or MIT
> 
> +use core::marker::PhantomPinned;
> +
> use kernel::{
>     clk::{
>         Clk,
> @@ -21,6 +23,13 @@
>         poll,
>         Io, //
>     },
> +    irq::{
> +        Flags,
> +        IrqReturn,
> +        ThreadedHandler,
> +        ThreadedIrqReturn,
> +        ThreadedRegistration, //
> +    },
>     new_mutex,
>     of,
>     platform,
> @@ -236,3 +245,102 @@ struct Regulators {
>     _mali: Regulator<regulator::Enabled>,
>     _sram: Regulator<regulator::Enabled>,
> }
> +
> +/// Trait describing the operations required to service a Tyr interrupt source.
> +pub(crate) trait TyrIrqTrait: Sync {

Can we move this and friends to its own irq.rs file? 

driver.rs is more of platform/device/initialization glue. I think it would be
more tidy if we split this. Additionally, I think TyrIrq, TyrIrqTrait and etc
can be their own patch, separate from the patch that adds support to FW IRQs
specifically. You can use #[expect(dead_code)] in patch 1.

> +    /// Returns the masked interrupt status.
> +    fn read_status(&self) -> u32;
> +
> +    /// Clears all bits in the mask register, disabling the interrupt sources.
> +    fn clear_mask(&self);
> +
> +    /// Sets the mask register to re-enable the interrupt sources.
> +    fn reenable_mask(&self);
> +
> +    /// Returns the raw interrupt status, regardless of the current mask.
> +    fn read_raw_status(&self) -> u32;
> +
> +    /// Clears the given bits in the interrupt status register.
> +    fn clear_status(&self, status: u32);
> +
> +    /// Returns the bitmask of interrupt sources handled by this instance.
> +    fn mask(&self) -> u32;
> +
> +    /// Handles the given pending, unmasked interrupt bits.
> +    fn handle(&self, status: u32);
> +}
> +
> +/// A threaded IRQ wrapper shared by all Tyr interrupt sources.
> +#[pin_data(PinnedDrop)]
> +pub(crate) struct TyrIrq<T: TyrIrqTrait> {
> +    /// The interrupt source.
> +    irq: T,
> +    #[pin]
> +    _pin: PhantomPinned,
> +}
> +
> +impl<T: TyrIrqTrait> TyrIrq<T> {
> +    /// Requests a threaded IRQ registration for `irq`, using `name` to look up the interrupt.
> +    ///
> +    /// # Safety
> +    ///
> +    /// Callers must not `mem::forget()` the resulting registration or otherwise prevent its
> +    /// [`Drop`] implementation from running.
> +    pub(crate) unsafe fn request<'a>(
> +        pdev: &'a platform::Device<Bound>,
> +        name: &'static CStr,
> +        irq: T,
> +    ) -> Result<impl PinInit<ThreadedRegistration<'a, Self>, Error> + 'a>
> +    where
> +        T: 'a,
> +    {

Instead of 'a, I think we should converge on the 'bound nomenclature. Is there
a reason why we are using 'a here instead? Same for JobIrq<‘a> and job_irq_init.


> +        let handler = try_pin_init!(Self {
> +            irq,
> +            _pin: PhantomPinned,
> +        });
> +
> +        // SAFETY: The caller guarantees the resulting registration will not be leaked.
> +        Ok(unsafe { pdev.request_threaded_irq_by_name(Flags::SHARED, name, name, handler) })
> +    }
> +
> +    /// Returns a reference to the wrapped interrupt source.
> +    pub(crate) fn irq(&self) -> &T {
> +        &self.irq
> +    }

The only caller seems to be pin_chain in job_irq_init()? I think we can remove
this accessor and just access the field directly in request().

> +}
> +
> +impl<T: TyrIrqTrait> ThreadedHandler for TyrIrq<T> {
> +    fn handle(&self) -> ThreadedIrqReturn {
> +        let masked_status = self.irq.read_status();
> +
> +        if masked_status == 0 {
> +            return ThreadedIrqReturn::None;
> +        }
> +        self.irq.clear_mask();
> +        ThreadedIrqReturn::WakeThread
> +    }
> +
> +    fn handle_threaded(&self) -> IrqReturn {
> +        let mut ret = IrqReturn::None;
> +
> +        loop {
> +            let raw_status = self.irq.read_raw_status() & self.irq.mask();
> +            if raw_status == 0 {
> +                break;
> +            }
> +            self.irq.clear_status(raw_status);
> +            self.irq.handle(raw_status);
> +            ret = IrqReturn::Handled;
> +        }
> +
> +        self.irq.reenable_mask();
> +        ret
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +#[pinned_drop]
> +impl<T: TyrIrqTrait> PinnedDrop for TyrIrq<T> {
> +    fn drop(self: Pin<&mut Self>) {
> +        self.irq.clear_mask();
> +    }

In Rust, the drop order is first a struct then its fields, and handler is a
field of ThreadedRegistration. By the time this drop runs, free_irq() has
already run. Ideally we'd write this in the opposite order.

Perhaps what would work is moving this drop into a separate type:

_job_irq_mask: JobIrqMaskGuard<'bound>,
job_irq: Pin<KBox<ThreadedRegistration<...>>>

Because within a struct, fields drop in their declaration order, so first all
firmware interrupts are masked, then free_irq() waits for the in-flight
interrupts before deregistering.

> +}
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw.rs b/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw.rs
> index 47d25c901bd0..8162b9806c97 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw.rs
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw.rs
> @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@
>     vm::Vm, //
> };
> 
> +pub(crate) mod irq;
> mod parser;
> 
> pub(super) const CSF_MCU_SHARED_REGION_START: u32 = 0x04000000;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw/irq.rs b/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw/irq.rs
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..fcdc0097f2dd
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tyr/fw/irq.rs
> @@ -0,0 +1,112 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 or MIT
> +
> +//! IRQ handling for the Job IRQ.
> +//!
> +//! The Job IRQ signals events from the MCU, including global interface acknowledgements.
> +#![allow(dead_code)]
> +
> +use core::sync::atomic::{
> +    AtomicBool,

kernel::sync::atomic::Atomic<bool>

> +    Ordering, //
> +};
> +
> +use kernel::{
> +    device::Bound, //
> +    io::Io,
> +    irq::ThreadedRegistration,
> +    platform,
> +    prelude::*,
> +    sync::{
> +        Arc,
> +        WaitQueue, //
> +    },
> +};
> +
> +use crate::{
> +    driver::{
> +        IoMem,
> +        TyrIrq,
> +        TyrIrqTrait, //
> +    },
> +    regs::job_control::{
> +        JOB_IRQ_CLEAR,
> +        JOB_IRQ_MASK,
> +        JOB_IRQ_RAWSTAT,
> +        JOB_IRQ_STATUS, //
> +    }, //
> +};
> +
> +// The Job IRQ, signalling requests or notification from the MCU.
> +pub(crate) struct JobIrq<'a> {
> +    /// GPU MMIO register mapping.
> +    iomem: Arc<IoMem<'a>>,
> +    /// Flag to signal firmware readiness.
> +    fw_ready: Arc<AtomicBool>,

kernel::sync::atomic::Atomic<bool>

> +    /// Wait queue used to signal firmware events to waiters.
> +    job_irq_wait: Arc<WaitQueue>,
> +}


I think I'd rather have a single type and a single Arc here, e.g.:

    /// The firmware events published by the Job IRQ handler, and the queue used
    /// to announce them.
    #[pin_data]
    pub(crate) struct JobIrqEvents {
        #[pin]
        wait: WaitQueue,
        /// Set once the firmware has signalled that the global interface is ready.
        ready: Atomic<bool>
    }

    impl JobIrqEvents {
        pub(crate) fn new() -> Result<Arc<Self>> {
            Arc::pin_init(
                pin_init!(JobIrqEvents {
                    wait <- new_waitqueue!(),
                    ready: AtomicBool::new(false),
                }),
                GFP_KERNEL,
            )
        }

        pub(crate) fn clear_ready(&self) {
            self.ready.store(false, Ordering::Relaxed);
        }

        pub(crate) fn wait_ready(&self, timeout_ms: Msecs) -> Result {
            self.wait.wait_event_timeout(
                || self.ready.load(Ordering::Acquire),
                msecs_to_jiffies(timeout_ms),
            )?;

            Ok(())
        }

        fn signal(&self, status: u32) { ... }
    }

> +
> +/// Requests a threaded IRQ registration for the Job IRQ.
> +///
> +/// # Safety
> +///
> +/// Callers must not `mem::forget()` the resulting registration or otherwise prevent its
> +/// [`Drop`] implementation from running.
> +pub(crate) unsafe fn job_irq_init<'a>(
> +    pdev: &'a platform::Device<Bound>,
> +    iomem: Arc<IoMem<'a>>,
> +    fw_ready: Arc<AtomicBool>,
> +    job_irq_wait: Arc<WaitQueue>,
> +) -> Result<impl PinInit<ThreadedRegistration<'a, TyrIrq<JobIrq<'a>>>, Error> + 'a> {
> +    let job_irq = JobIrq {
> +        iomem,
> +        fw_ready,
> +        job_irq_wait,
> +    };
> +    // Ensure interrupt sources are disabled until the handler is registered.
> +    job_irq.clear_mask();

IIRC panthor also clears the status here?

> +
> +    // SAFETY: The caller guarantees the resulting registration will not be leaked.
> +    let registration = unsafe { TyrIrq::request(pdev, c"job", job_irq) };
> +
> +    // Unmask once the handler has been successfully registered.
> +    Ok(registration?.pin_chain(|reg| {
> +        reg.handler().irq().reenable_mask();
> +        Ok(())
> +    }))
> +}
> +
> +impl TyrIrqTrait for JobIrq<'_> {
> +    fn read_status(&self) -> u32 {
> +        self.iomem.read(JOB_IRQ_STATUS).into_raw()
> +    }
> +
> +    fn clear_mask(&self) {
> +        self.iomem.write_reg(JOB_IRQ_MASK::zeroed());
> +    }
> +
> +    fn reenable_mask(&self) {
> +        self.iomem.write_reg(JOB_IRQ_MASK::zeroed().with_glb(true));
> +    }

Can this use mask() internally, please? :)

> +
> +    fn read_raw_status(&self) -> u32 {
> +        self.iomem.read(JOB_IRQ_RAWSTAT).into_raw()
> +    }
> +
> +    fn clear_status(&self, status: u32) {
> +        self.iomem.write_reg(JOB_IRQ_CLEAR::from_raw(status));
> +    }
> +
> +    fn mask(&self) -> u32 {
> +        JOB_IRQ_MASK::zeroed().with_glb(true).into_raw()
> +    }
> +
> +    fn handle(&self, status: u32) {
> +        // TODO: handle other Job IRQ events (e.g. CSG attention bits) here once
> +        // support for them is added.
> +        if JOB_IRQ_RAWSTAT::from_raw(status).glb() {
> +            self.fw_ready.store(true, Ordering::Release);

We only need to store this once. In fact, the “firmware is now ready”
meaning only applies during power up from the hardware’s perspective.


> +            self.job_irq_wait.wake_up_all();

We need to wake up waiters unconditionally. Not a problem now,
but this will be a problem in the future.

> +        }
> +    }
> +}
> 
> ---
> base-commit: 0710742e26a06c2c3167e77a8ea82b59632d9f7a
> change-id: 20260728-tyr-irq-v2-0b3c5022be33
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Laura Nao <[email protected]>
> 
> 

Currently, the firmware booting code will poll for “fw_ready”. Can you
replace that with the JobIrqEvents logic you are introducing above?

— Daniel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.