[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180913124213.32065-1-ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:42:13 +0200
From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
To: <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
<linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
<alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: at91: don't use the same irqchip with multiple gpiochips
Sharing the same irqchip with multiple gpiochips is not a good
practice. For instance, when installing hooks, we change the state
of the irqchip. The initial state of the irqchip for the second
gpiochip to register is then disrupted.
Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
---
Hi,
This patch fixes the issue encountered in linux-next because of
"gpiolib: override irq_enable/disable". As discussed [1], the gpiolib
can do some extra checks but sharing the same irqchip with multiple
gpiochips is seen as a bad practice.
[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg676097.html
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
index cfd8239f2727..911ea0fe2a41 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
@@ -1574,16 +1574,6 @@ void at91_pinctrl_gpio_resume(void)
#define gpio_irq_set_wake NULL
#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
-static struct irq_chip gpio_irqchip = {
- .name = "GPIO",
- .irq_ack = gpio_irq_ack,
- .irq_disable = gpio_irq_mask,
- .irq_mask = gpio_irq_mask,
- .irq_unmask = gpio_irq_unmask,
- /* .irq_set_type is set dynamically */
- .irq_set_wake = gpio_irq_set_wake,
-};
-
static void gpio_irq_handler(struct irq_desc *desc)
{
struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
@@ -1624,12 +1614,22 @@ static int at91_gpio_of_irq_setup(struct platform_device *pdev,
struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_prev = NULL;
struct at91_gpio_chip *prev = NULL;
struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(at91_gpio->pioc_virq);
+ struct irq_chip *gpio_irqchip;
int ret, i;
+ gpio_irqchip = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*gpio_irqchip), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!gpio_irqchip)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
at91_gpio->pioc_hwirq = irqd_to_hwirq(d);
- /* Setup proper .irq_set_type function */
- gpio_irqchip.irq_set_type = at91_gpio->ops->irq_type;
+ gpio_irqchip->name = "GPIO";
+ gpio_irqchip->irq_ack = gpio_irq_ack;
+ gpio_irqchip->irq_disable = gpio_irq_mask;
+ gpio_irqchip->irq_mask = gpio_irq_mask;
+ gpio_irqchip->irq_unmask = gpio_irq_unmask;
+ gpio_irqchip->irq_set_wake = gpio_irq_set_wake,
+ gpio_irqchip->irq_set_type = at91_gpio->ops->irq_type;
/* Disable irqs of this PIO controller */
writel_relaxed(~0, at91_gpio->regbase + PIO_IDR);
@@ -1640,7 +1640,7 @@ static int at91_gpio_of_irq_setup(struct platform_device *pdev,
* interrupt.
*/
ret = gpiochip_irqchip_add(&at91_gpio->chip,
- &gpio_irqchip,
+ gpio_irqchip,
0,
handle_edge_irq,
IRQ_TYPE_NONE);
@@ -1658,7 +1658,7 @@ static int at91_gpio_of_irq_setup(struct platform_device *pdev,
if (!gpiochip_prev) {
/* Then register the chain on the parent IRQ */
gpiochip_set_chained_irqchip(&at91_gpio->chip,
- &gpio_irqchip,
+ gpio_irqchip,
at91_gpio->pioc_virq,
gpio_irq_handler);
return 0;
--
2.12.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists