[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1768585.5TrMbB8pvA@diego>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 20:17:34 +0100
From: Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Chris Zhong <zyw@...k-chips.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: rockchip: Fix enable/disable/mask/unmask
Am Dienstag, 18. November 2014, 15:49:56 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> The Rockchip pinctrl driver was only implementing the "mask" and
> "unmask" operations though the hardware actually has two distinct
> things: enable/disable and mask/unmask. It was implementing the
> "mask" operations as a hardware enable/disable and always leaving all
> interrupts unmasked.
>
> I believe that the old system had some downsides, specifically:
> - (Untested) if an interrupt went off while interrupts were "masked"
> it would be lost. Now it will be kept track of.
> - If someone wanted to change an interrupt back into a GPIO (is such a
> thing sensible?) by calling irq_disable() it wouldn't actually take
> effect. That's because Linux does some extra optimizations when
> there's no true "disable" function: it does a lazy mask.
>
> Let's actually implement enable/disable/mask/unmask properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
There is one small issue concerning a personal style-preference below.
Otherwise
Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
@LinusW: any preference on how to handle these follow up changes - like
another pull on top of the last, or do you simply want to apply these two
yourself?
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c index e91e845..60d1a49 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> @@ -1562,6 +1562,28 @@ static void rockchip_irq_resume(struct irq_data *d)
> irq_reg_writel(gc, bank->saved_enables, GPIO_INTEN);
> }
>
> +static void rockchip_irq_disable(struct irq_data *d)
> +{
> + struct irq_chip_generic *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + u32 val;
> +
> + irq_gc_lock(gc);
> + val = irq_reg_readl(gc, GPIO_INTEN);
> + irq_reg_writel(gc, val & ~d->mask, GPIO_INTEN);
personally I'd prefer this to be a bit more spread out, i.e.
val = irq_reg_readl(gc, GPIO_INTEN);
val &= ~d->mask;
irq_reg_writel(gc, val, GPIO_INTEN);
makes reading a bit easier
> + irq_gc_unlock(gc);
> +}
> +
> +static void rockchip_irq_enable(struct irq_data *d)
> +{
> + struct irq_chip_generic *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + u32 val;
> +
> + irq_gc_lock(gc);
> + val = irq_reg_readl(gc, GPIO_INTEN);
> + irq_reg_writel(gc, val | d->mask, GPIO_INTEN);
same here
> + irq_gc_unlock(gc);
> +}
> +
> static int rockchip_interrupts_register(struct platform_device *pdev,
> struct rockchip_pinctrl *info)
> {
> @@ -1600,11 +1622,13 @@ static int rockchip_interrupts_register(struct
> platform_device *pdev, gc = irq_get_domain_generic_chip(bank->domain, 0);
> gc->reg_base = bank->reg_base;
> gc->private = bank;
> - gc->chip_types[0].regs.mask = GPIO_INTEN;
> + gc->chip_types[0].regs.mask = GPIO_INTMASK;
> gc->chip_types[0].regs.ack = GPIO_PORTS_EOI;
> gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_ack = irq_gc_ack_set_bit;
> - gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_mask = irq_gc_mask_clr_bit;
> - gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_unmask = irq_gc_mask_set_bit;
> + gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_mask = irq_gc_mask_set_bit;
> + gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_unmask = irq_gc_mask_clr_bit;
> + gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_enable = rockchip_irq_enable;
> + gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_disable = rockchip_irq_disable;
> gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_set_wake = irq_gc_set_wake;
> gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_suspend = rockchip_irq_suspend;
> gc->chip_types[0].chip.irq_resume = rockchip_irq_resume;
--
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