linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] mfd: da9063: Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 6 Jun 2018 00:58:19 +0200
From:   Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>
To:     Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] mfd: da9063: Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L

On 06/05/2018 09:52 PM, Steve Twiss wrote:
> Hi Marek,

Hi,

> Thanks.
> 
> On 02 June 2018 11:12, Marek Vasut wrote,
> 
>> Subject: [PATCH v3 07/10] mfd: da9063: Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L
>>
>> While the datasheet for DA9063L (2v1, 23-Mar-2017) lists the RTC register
>> block, the DA9063L does not have an RTC. Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L to
>> ignore the Alarm and Tick IRQs from the PMIC.
> 
> I've added a request to remove the RTC references from the DA9063L datasheet.
> 
> Adding that first part to the sentence in the commit log: "While the datasheet for DA9063L
> (2v1, 23-Mar-2017) lists the RTC register block" is just pointing out an ambiguity from the
> datasheet since the it also identifies those registers in Table 102 on page 126 as
> "Reserved".
> 
> I would like to suggest, the commit log entry: "Add custom IRQ map for DA9063L to ignore
> the Alarm and Tick IRQs from the PMIC".

OK, I'll hide it.

>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>
>> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
>> Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
>> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
>> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
>> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
>> ---
>> V3: New patch
>> ---
>>  drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c | 55
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c
>> index 5b406ecfc14a..b6a88861cc2e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c
>> @@ -74,8 +74,55 @@ static const struct regmap_irq_chip da9063_irq_chip = {
>>  	.init_ack_masked = true,
>>  };
>>
>> +static const struct regmap_irq da9063l_irqs[] = {
>> +	/* DA9063 event A register */
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ONKEY,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ONKEY),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ADC_RDY,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ADC_RDY),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_SEQ_RDY,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_SEQ_RDY),
>> +	/* DA9063 event B register */
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_WAKE,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_WAKE),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_TEMP,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_TEMP),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_COMP_1V2,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_COMP_1V2),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_LDO_LIM,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_LDO_LIM),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_REG_UVOV,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_UVOV),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_DVC_RDY,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_DVC_RDY),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_VDD_MON,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_VDD_MON),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_WARN,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_B_OFFSET, DA9063_M_VDD_WARN),
>> +	/* DA9063 event C register */
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI0, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI0),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI1, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI1),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI2, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI2),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI3, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI3),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI4, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI4),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI5, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI5),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI6, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI6),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI7, DA9063_REG_EVENT_C_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI7),
>> +	/* DA9063 event D register */
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI8, DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI8),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI9, DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET,
>> DA9063_M_GPI9),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI10,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI10),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI11,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI11),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI12,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI12),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI13,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI13),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI14,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI14),
>> +	REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_GPI15,
>> DA9063_REG_EVENT_D_OFFSET, DA9063_M_GPI15),
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct regmap_irq_chip da9063l_irq_chip = {
>> +	.name = "da9063l-irq",
>> +	.irqs = da9063l_irqs,
>> +	.num_irqs = DA9063_NUM_IRQ,
> 
> Isn't the number of IRQs in the DA9063L different to the standard DA9063
> because of the missing RTC?

I think this can even be replaced by ARRAY_SIZE() ?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut