[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2536791.bQXJji6XBC@flatron>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:30:25 +0200
From: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc: Lars Poeschel <poeschel@...onage.de>,
Lars Poeschel <larsi@....tu-dresden.de>,
grant.likely@...aro.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
ian.campbell@...rix.com, galak@...eaurora.org, pawel.moll@....com,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
Enric Balletbo i Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Balaji T K <balajitk@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Jon Hunter <jgchunter@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: interrupt consistency check for OF GPIO IRQs
On Thursday 22 of August 2013 15:08:12 Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/22/2013 03:01 AM, Lars Poeschel wrote:
> > On Thursday 22 August 2013 at 01:10:27, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 08/21/2013 03:49 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c
> >>>>
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + if (irq_domain && irq_domain->ops->xlate)
> >>>> + irq_domain->ops->xlate(irq_domain,
gcn,
> >>>> + intspec +
i, intsize,
> >>>> + &hwirq,
&type);
> >>>> + else
> >>>> + hwirq = intspec[0];
> >>>
> >>> Is it a correct fallback when irq_domain is NULL?
> >>
> >> Indeed this fallback is dangerous. The /only/ way to parse an IRQ
> >> specifier is with binding-specific knowledge, which is obtained by
> >> calling irq_domain->ops->xlate(). If the IRQ domain can't be found,
> >> this operation simply has to be deferred; we can't just guess and
> >> hope.>
> > At least the of irq mapping code make this assumption also:
> > kernel/irq/irqdomain.c:483
> > It should be valid for us here too.
> > The additional assumption that I made is that if irq_domain == NULL
> > (not only xlate), that we can use intspec[0] either.
>
> OK, I guess it's likely this won't cause any additional issue then. I
> suspect most IRQ domains use within the context of device tree already
> provide an explicit xlate op anyway; for example irq_domain_simple_ops
> points at the default irq_domain_xlate_onetwocell.
We got away from the problem I pointed in my reply. If irq_domain == NULL,
there is no way to translate specifier to hwirq (and in what domain such
hwirq would be in anyway?).
> >>>> +
> >>>> + hwirq = be32_to_cpu(hwirq);
> >>>
> >>> Is this conversion correct? I don't think hwirq could be big endian
> >>> here (unless running on a big endian CPU).
> >>
> >> I think that should be inside the else branch above.
> >
> > No it has to be in both branches as it is. Device tree data is big
> > endian. The conversion is converting big endian data (from device
> > tree in both cases) to cpu endianess and not coverting TO big endian.
> > My test machine is a arm in little endian mode and it provided wrong
> > values if I did not do the conversion.
> > What I am a bit unsure about is if the xlate function is expecting the
> > intspec pointer to point to big endian device tree data or data
> > already
> > converted to cpu endianess. For the standard xlate functions
> > irq_domain_xlate_[one|two|onetwo]cell it does not matter.
>
> The xlate function assumes that data is already converted to CPU-endian.
> See:
>
> irq_of_parse_and_map() ->
> of_irq_map_one() ->
> of_irq_map_raw() ->
> out_irq->specifier[i] = of_read_number(intspec +i, 1);
> irq_create_of_mapping()
>
> (of_read_number does the be32_to_cpu() internally)
So basically to be correct, the code here would need to read the specifier
into internal buffer using a helper like of_read_number() or maybe even
of_property_read_u32_array() and then pass this buffer to xlate().
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists