[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180523091220.jfguqui75rup5qpl@verge.net.au>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 11:12:20 +0200
From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To: Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@...esas.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
Hoan Tran <hotran@....com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Michel Pollet <michel.pollet@...renesas.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: dwapb: Rework support for 1 interrupt per port A
GPIO
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 09:52:44AM +0100, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> Treat DT and ACPI the same as much as possible. Note that we can't use
> platform_get_irq() to get the DT interrupts as they are in the port
> sub-node and hence do not have an associated platform device.
>
> This also fixes a problem introduced with error checking when calling
> platform_get_irq().
What is the problem? In general I think fixes should be in separate
patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@...esas.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c
> index 7dcd06b..15b4154 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c
> @@ -444,7 +444,7 @@ static void dwapb_configure_irqs(struct dwapb_gpio *gpio,
> int i;
>
> for (i = 0; i < pp->ngpio; i++) {
> - if (pp->irq[i])
> + if (pp->irq[i] >= 0)
> irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(pp->irq[i],
> dwapb_irq_handler, gpio);
> }
> @@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ dwapb_gpio_get_pdata(struct device *dev)
> struct dwapb_platform_data *pdata;
> struct dwapb_port_property *pp;
> int nports;
> - int i;
> + int i, j;
>
> nports = device_get_child_node_count(dev);
> if (nports == 0)
> @@ -580,6 +580,8 @@ dwapb_gpio_get_pdata(struct device *dev)
>
> i = 0;
> device_for_each_child_node(dev, fwnode) {
> + struct device_node *np = NULL;
> +
> pp = &pdata->properties[i++];
> pp->fwnode = fwnode;
>
> @@ -599,46 +601,35 @@ dwapb_gpio_get_pdata(struct device *dev)
> pp->ngpio = 32;
> }
>
> + pp->irq_shared = false;
> + pp->gpio_base = -1;
> +
> /*
> * Only port A can provide interrupts in all configurations of
> * the IP.
> */
> - if (dev->of_node && pp->idx == 0 &&
> - fwnode_property_read_bool(fwnode,
> - "interrupt-controller")) {
> - struct device_node *np = to_of_node(fwnode);
> - unsigned int j;
> -
> - /*
> - * The IP has configuration options to allow a single
> - * combined interrupt or one per gpio. If one per gpio,
> - * some might not be used.
> - */
> - for (j = 0; j < pp->ngpio; j++) {
> - int irq = of_irq_get(np, j);
> - if (irq < 0)
> - continue;
> -
> - pp->irq[j] = irq;
> - pp->has_irq = true;
> - }
> + if (pp->idx != 0)
> + continue;
>
> - if (!pp->has_irq)
> - dev_warn(dev, "no irq for port%d\n", pp->idx);
> + if (dev->of_node && fwnode_property_read_bool(fwnode,
> + "interrupt-controller")) {
> + np = to_of_node(fwnode);
> }
>
> - if (has_acpi_companion(dev) && pp->idx == 0) {
> - unsigned int j;
> + for (j = 0; j < pp->ngpio; j++) {
> + pp->irq[j] = -ENXIO;
>
> - for (j = 0; j < pp->ngpio; j++) {
> + if (np)
> + pp->irq[j] = of_irq_get(np, j);
> + else if (has_acpi_companion(dev))
> pp->irq[j] = platform_get_irq(to_platform_device(dev), j);
> - if (pp->irq[j])
> - pp->has_irq = true;
> - }
> +
> + if (pp->irq[j] >= 0)
> + pp->has_irq = true;
> }
>
> - pp->irq_shared = false;
> - pp->gpio_base = -1;
> + if (!pp->has_irq)
> + dev_warn(dev, "no irq for port%d\n", pp->idx);
> }
>
> return pdata;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists