What is the use case of GIC interrupt bypass - arm

I am not able to relate to the use case of GIC interrupt bypass in linux.
Is there a acutal usecase for it?

Related

Handling multiple interrupts with FreeRTOS on STM32

My MCU based control system must check 18 switch contact status fastly. I will use STM32F7 MCU and it has maximum 16 int. handler. So I have been decided to use IO expendar IC and divided groups. Now I have 12 IO external interrupt and 2 more interrupt comes from IO expander. In addition FreeRTOS will has ethernet, uart and canbus tasks for communications. Interrupts are very critical for system. There is milisecond difference between them and I have to detect all pins status correctly. I need and expert advice for this situation.
My questions are :
Is this a proper way ? Using 14 external interrupt onFreeRTOS that handles multiple communication task
Is there any better way for it ?
Using an IO expander seems like the wrong approach to your problem (additional complexity and cost). You don't have to assign a dedicated ISR to each pin. Just read the GPIOx_IDR register after any GPIO interrupt, then check the relevant bits STM32 Datasheet

What happens when a interrupt occurs in RTOS while currently in any task or another ISR?

I have read this question, It is not a valid answer when one interrupt is executing it will not disable all the other interrupts always. It is based on the interrupt type (in some case we need to do manually in our program).
My Question is what happens when a interrupt occurs while executing a
interrupt ??? If Low priority interrupt is executing then High
priority interrupt occurs the what will happen ?
It depends on the system. If the microcontroller/interrupt controller supports nested interrupts and the application enables that feature then a higher priority interrupt will interrupt a lower priority interrupt. In this case the lower priority interrupt will resume when the higher priority interrupt is complete. But if the system does not support nested interrupts then the subsequent interrupt request will pend and be serviced when the active interrupt service routine is complete.
It is too broad for SO, I think and it is arch based.
I try to give you a brief overview, expecting some DV on it. ;)
Mainly, if the arch allow nested interrupts, the interrupt with lower priority is interrupted while executing to jump to the ISR of high level interrupt.
But you can have NMI (Non Maskable Interrupt) that have priority on all other interrupts and cannot be disable.
Usually (all I think) archs have also a global interrupt enable flag, so it must be enabled to allow other interrupts to be served. Also means that an ISR, when is executing, can disable other interrupts during its job.
You can think, for example, on an RTOS implementation: the scheduler can be easily developed using a Timer within its interrupt. This interrupt must have the lower priority and mustn't stops other interrupts (usually): this grant that interrupts are served a soon as possible not considering context switch of RTOS scheduler.
The question was
What happens when a interrupt occurs in RTOS while currently in any task or another ISR?
I have written two commercial RTOS's and there is no answer that satisfies all of the criteria. However, I CAN answer as broadly as the question:
Depending on what is allowed, it will act as a normal interrupt. The problem with this question is that "what happens" is a little broad - some RTOS's do work behind the scenes with interrupts. So, the problem is that the question is not specific enough.
"What happens" in regards to a task is that NOTHING happens in regards to a task. An interrupt is an interrupt and what the relation to a task is depends on the programming. Since I don't read minds, again, the question is not specific enough.
The BEST answer is 42 (HHGTTG)
There is no one answer, sometimes nothing happens the lower prio interrupt continues to completion, sometimes the higher one interrupts the lower. It depends first on the chip/system design, second it depends on the individual programmers across the board RTOS and application folks.
Or another way to say it is, what happens is what those individuals desired to happen in their design and implementation.

Difference between Generic Interrupt Controller and Nested Vectored Interrupt controller

I saw that Cortex A9 supports a GIC. How is it different from NVIC?
Are these two mutually exclusive? Meaning if GIC exists the NVIC does not?
please share your thoughts
Below are the answers
Are these two mutually exclusive? Meaning if GIC exists the NVIC does not?
Yes. Your understanding is correct.
Why?
Any processor/core can support only one interrupt controller. Because HW will become more complex if we have two interrupt controller and it is not feasible.
GIC has more feature and multicore support you can check below link for more information
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/198123/latest

fiq & irq handler -- arm

I am new to arm & have some doubs related to IRQ & FIQ. Please try to clarify these.
How many number of FIQ & IRQ channel arm have ?
And what number of handlers can we write for each channel ?
Also if we can register multiple handler for single interrupt channel how arm comes to know which handler to run.
The distinction between IRQ and FIQ goes right the way back to early days of ARM when it was designed by Acorn. It was always the case that the IRQ line was attached to an interrupt controller that multiplexed a large number of interrupt sources together. This is precisely what happens in all modern ARMs
The rationale behind the FIQ was to provide an extremely low latency response with maximum priority (it can safely pre-empt the IRQ handler). The comparatively large number of shadow registers facilitate writing handlers that store the handler's state in CPU registers and not hitting the stack.
The shadow registers are almost of the opposite set to those commonly used by APCS for function call, so writing handlers in C, would cause a push and eventual pop of up to 8 non-shadowed registers. Having any kind of interrupt demultiplexing wipes out any performance advantage that FIQ might have given.
All of this means that there is only really any benefit in using FIQ for very specialised applications where really hard-real time interrupt response is required for one interrupting device, and you're willing to write your handler in assembler. You'll also be left with working out how to synchronise with the rest of the system - some of which would rely on disabling IRQ to keep data synchronised.
traditionally the arm has one interrupt line which you can send to one of two handlers FIQ or IRQ. FIQ has a larger bank of FIQ mode only registers so you have fewer that you need to store on the stack. From there you read the vendor specific registers if any to determine the source of the interrupt and then branch into separate handlers.
More recently there have bend arm architectures with many interrupts 128, 256 each with a separate handler. So generically asking about arm is not as varied but about like asking something generic about x86.
All of this information is easily available in the ARM architectural reference manuals for the different architectures and the pinouts to the core (what the vendor builds its chip around) is documented in the technical reference manuals for the various cores (also very easy to obtain). infocenter.arm.com has the architecture and technical reference manuals as well as amba/axi (the data bus that the vendor connects to). Your question is completely answered in those documents.
The ARM processor directly supports only ONE IRQ and ONE FIQ. ARM supports multiple interrupts through a peripheral called Interrupt Controller. ARM standard interrupt controllers are called GIC (Generic Interrupt Controller).
The GIC has a number of inputs for peripherals to connect their interrupt lines and two output lines that connect to IRQ and FIQ. Basically it acts as a MUX. A GIC driver will setup configurations such as interrupt priority, type (IRQ/FIQ), masking etc.
In traditional ARM systems there is one entry each for IRQ and FIQ in the Exception Vectors. Depending on which line the interrupt fired, IRQ or FIQ handler is called. The interrupt handler queries the GIC (GIC CPU interface registers, to be specific) to get the interrupt number. Based on this interrupt number, corresponding device handler is invoked.
Number of interrupts depends on the specific GIC implementation. So you would have to check the manual for the interrupt controller in your system to get those specifics.
Note: The interrupt handling is slightly different depending on which specific ARM core you are coding for.
Actually the question is a bit tricky. You must specify in the question to which architecture in ARM you work. ARM v7-A and ARM v7-R Architecture Reference Manual (ARM ARM) specifies one FIQ and one IRQ, as many already answered. But ARMv7-M (used in Cortex-M processors) integrates a interrupt controller in the processor, and thus offers one NMI (instead of FIQ) and up to 240 IRQ lines.
For more information: ARMv7 A and ARMv7-R Architecure reference manual: http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0406c/index.html
ARMv7-M Architecture Reference Manual: http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0403e.b/index.html
As an example, Cortex M4 specs sheet: http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-m/cortex-m4-processor.php

Embedded system interrupt / hardware handling from Linux

On my AT91SAM9RL-EK ARM board, running a Linux 2.6.30 buildroot, I have the following.
cat /proc/interrupts
CPU0
1: 6475 AIC at91_tick, rtc0, ttyS0
10: 11 AIC mmc0
13: 4 AIC atmel_spi.0
18: 23533 AIC tc_clkevt
20: 0 AIC atmel_tsadcc
22: 0 AIC atmel_usba_udc
23: 0 AIC atmel_lcdfb
24: 0 AIC AC97C
40: 1 GPIO atmel_usba_udc
47: 0 GPIO mmc0
64: 6 GPIO Right Click
65: 10 GPIO Left Click
The right and left click are the buttons on my board. Now I want to modify the interrupt handlers for the buttons (for example that they give me an output when clicked).
Where can I find the interrupt handlers or drivers (or the sourcefiles for them) for the buttons?
Or can I write my own drivers and register them (while I am in user-space) for the buttons and how?
This is some data from the boards guide about the PIO
IO... Per.... Application Usage............................................ Pow. by
PB0 TXD3 USER’S PUSH BUTTON 1 PB0 as LEFT CLICK VDDIOP
PB1 RXD3 USER’S PUSH BUTTON 2 PB1 as RIGHT CLICK VDDIOP
I don't have a specific answer for your board, but I can give you some pointers with the information you need.
The simplest way to solve your problem is to drop the 'interrupt handlers' requirement and simply poll the GPIO lines. You can do this from userspace, so long as you're root. Many development environments supply a kernel module to do this for you, exposing the results as an entry in /dev or /proc.
If you're going to handle interrupts, you need to write a Linux device driver. The best place to start here is the awesome Linux Device Drivers book, downloadable at http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/
A GPIO driver is very simple and will mostly consist of a call to register_irq() and your userspace interface code. The userspace interface code will be much larger than the rest of the code and also cause you the most headaches.
I don't have any experience with the specific board and buildroot, but it might be interesting to look into gpio.txt in the Documentation dir inside the kernel tree. There's some explanation on how to use GPIO from userspace using sysfs.

Resources