• Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 119 subscribers
  • Views 4202 views
  • Users 0 members are here
2025 survey

We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.

Options
Related
How was your experience today?
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

PL390 GIC Interrupt Grouping

Stefan Kalkowski
Parents
  • Arm Employee Badge
    Note: This was originally posted on 25th July 2012 at http://forums.arm.com

    Do you really mean the PL390, or the integrated IC in the MPCore?  Not that it matters too much at this point.

    I think this is a GICv1 vs GICv2 spec thing which I've hit in the past.  In GICv2 the secure copy of the GICD_CTLR has enable bits for group 0 and 1.  In GICv1 the secure GICD_CTRL is _only_ required to have the group 0 enable bit, it is IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED whether bit 1 is the group 1 enable.  :-(  The PL390/GIC-390 (which is GICv1) does not implement this bit.
Reply
  • Arm Employee Badge
    Note: This was originally posted on 25th July 2012 at http://forums.arm.com

    Do you really mean the PL390, or the integrated IC in the MPCore?  Not that it matters too much at this point.

    I think this is a GICv1 vs GICv2 spec thing which I've hit in the past.  In GICv2 the secure copy of the GICD_CTLR has enable bits for group 0 and 1.  In GICv1 the secure GICD_CTRL is _only_ required to have the group 0 enable bit, it is IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED whether bit 1 is the group 1 enable.  :-(  The PL390/GIC-390 (which is GICv1) does not implement this bit.
Children
No data