Bring MIPS INTRNG support up to date

[sgalabov]

Summary

D5730 changed the INTRNG PIC interface, so as a result MIPS INTRNG became unusable.
This revision aims to bring MIPS INTRNG support back again and at the level defined by D5370.

Test Plan

Tested on MT7688 LinkIt.

[kan]

sys/mips/mips/mips_pic.c

176 ↗

(On Diff #14885)

This needs to be addressed before commit?

209 ↗

(On Diff #14885)

0, sc->nirqs - 1 ?

[sgalabov]

Updated diffs to reflect kan@'s comments.

[kan]

sys/mips/mips/mips_pic.c

83 ↗

(On Diff #14895)

Come to think of it, what is the purpose of rman here? It serves to useful purpose but to provide a fake struct resource for cpu_establish_hard|soft_intr. I would just kill it off for now - it does not look like INTRNG plugs into resource allocation properly anyway.

[adrian]

thanks!

[skra]

sys/mips/mips/mips_pic.c

83 ↗

(On Diff #14895)

Another solution is to change interrupt number argument to struct resource pointer in cpu_establish_hardintr() and cpu_establish_softintr(). And whoever wants to use these functions should get a struct resource by call to bus_allocate_resource().

BTW, INTRNG doesn't plug into resource allocation properly only for interrupt numbers get from ofw_bus_map_intr(). And it should be fixed soon.

[sgalabov]

sys/mips/mips/mips_pic.c

83 ↗

(On Diff #14895)

That's true, but I couldn't think of a cleaner way to satisfy intr_setup_irq()'s requirement for a struct resource * parameter. And although I could go and change all users of cpu_establish_*_intr, this seems even more troublesome at the moment.
So, if you guys don't mind, I'd like to leave the rman as it is, even though it's a bit of an overkill.

[adrian]

I'm happy with it being as-is for now.

[skra]

sys/mips/mips/mips_pic.c

83 ↗

(On Diff #14895)

I'm okay with it, even if it's quite weird. It was just a note from me. However, INTRNG is meant to be used by bus drivers in their bus methods where struct resource is always present. So if it's used another way, curious things come.

[skra]

Thanks that you are doing this. I thought that I would do this later, as there was no immediate need to do it in D5730. Thus, thanks again and sorry for trouble.

[sgalabov]

In D5838#124795, @skra wrote:

Thanks that you are doing this. I thought that I would do this later, as there was no immediate need to do it in D5730. Thus, thanks again and sorry for trouble.

No problem. I am relying on INTRNG for the Ralink/Mediatek support that I'm starting to push into -head, so I needed to do it anyway :-) I hope I've done it right.

[kan]

OK, this can go in as is for now.