| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <8f37c4d8-44d4-50d0-26c4-af31706a1d0c@nvidia.com>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2019 13:39:31 -0700
From: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
CC: <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <jckuo@...dia.com>, <talho@...dia.com>,
<josephl@...dia.com>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 10/12] gpio: tegra: implement wake event support for
Tegra210 and prior GPIO
On 5/22/19 6:24 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 04:31:21PM -0700, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
>> The GPIO controller doesn't have any controls to enable the system to
>> wake up from low power states based on activity on GPIO pins. An extra
>> hardware block that is part of the power management controller (PMC)
>> contains these controls. In order for the GPIO controller to be able
>> to cooperate with the PMC, obtain a reference to the PMC's IRQ domain
>> and make it a parent to the GPIO controller's IRQ domain. This way the
>> PMC gets an opportunity to program the additional registers required
>> to enable wakeup sources on suspend.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 103 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c
>> index 6d9b6906b9d0..d57e33050d0c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tegra.c
>> @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
>> #include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
>> #include <linux/pm.h>
>>
>> +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +
>> #define GPIO_BANK(x) ((x) >> 5)
>> #define GPIO_PORT(x) (((x) >> 3) & 0x3)
>> #define GPIO_BIT(x) ((x) & 0x7)
>> @@ -275,8 +277,22 @@ static int tegra_gpio_set_config(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
>> static int tegra_gpio_to_irq(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
>> {
>> struct tegra_gpio_info *tgi = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
>> + struct irq_domain *domain = tgi->irq_domain;
>> +
>> + if (!gpiochip_irqchip_irq_valid(chip, offset))
>> + return -ENXIO;
>> +
>> + if (irq_domain_is_hierarchy(domain)) {
>> + struct irq_fwspec spec;
>> +
>> + spec.fwnode = domain->fwnode;
>> + spec.param_count = 2;
>> + spec.param[0] = offset;
>> + spec.param[1] = IRQ_TYPE_NONE;
>> + return irq_domain_alloc_irqs(domain, 1, NUMA_NO_NODE, &spec);
>> + }
>>
>> - return irq_find_mapping(tgi->irq_domain, offset);
>> + return irq_find_mapping(domain, offset);
>> }
>>
>> static void tegra_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *d)
>> @@ -365,7 +381,10 @@ static int tegra_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
>> else if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING))
>> irq_set_handler_locked(d, handle_edge_irq);
>>
>> - return 0;
>> + if (d->parent_data)
>> + return irq_chip_set_type_parent(d, type);
>> + else
>> + return 0;
> Why is this needed?
Invoking GPIO irq_domain parent's set_type to configure PMC wake level
based on the type for those GPIO's
that are wake-able thru specified PMC wake events.
>
>> }
>>
>> static void tegra_gpio_irq_shutdown(struct irq_data *d)
>> @@ -566,10 +585,79 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops tegra_gpio_pm_ops = {
>> SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(tegra_gpio_suspend, tegra_gpio_resume)
>> };
>>
>> +static int tegra_gpio_irq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *domain,
>> + struct irq_fwspec *fwspec,
>> + unsigned long *hwirq,
>> + unsigned int *type)
>> +{
>> + if (WARN_ON(fwspec->param_count < 2))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + *type = fwspec->param[1] & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
>> + *hwirq = fwspec->param[0];
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int tegra_gpio_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>> + unsigned int virq,
>> + unsigned int num_irqs, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct tegra_gpio_info *tgi = gpiochip_get_data(domain->host_data);
>> + struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
>> + struct irq_fwspec spec;
> You can put the above two lines onto a single line.
>
Will fix in next version
>> + struct tegra_gpio_bank *bank;
>> + unsigned long hwirq;
>> + unsigned int type;
>> + int err = 0;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON(fwspec->param_count < 2))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + if (!irq_domain_get_of_node(domain->parent))
>> + return -EINVAL;
> Can this ever fail?
Will remove in next version of updated series..
>
>> +
>> + err = tegra_gpio_irq_domain_translate(domain, fwspec, &hwirq, &type);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>> +
>> + bank = &tgi->bank_info[GPIO_BANK(hwirq)];
>> + err = irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq, hwirq,
>> + &tgi->ic, bank);
>> +
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + return err;
>> +
>> + spec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
>> + spec.param_count = 3;
>> + spec.param[0] = GIC_SPI;
>> + spec.param[1] = fwspec->param[0];
>> + spec.param[2] = fwspec->param[1];
>> +
>> + return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, 1, &spec);
> What if num_irqs is different from 1? I'm not exactly sure what to pass
> as &spec, but likely we'd have to create an array of struct irq_fwspec
> and pass that along. It seems like some drivers catch that case and
> refuse to work rather than pass potentially rubbish information along.
> See for example drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c.
Will fix in next version
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct irq_domain_ops tegra_gpio_irq_domain_ops = {
>> + .translate = tegra_gpio_irq_domain_translate,
>> + .alloc = tegra_gpio_irq_domain_alloc,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct of_device_id tegra_pmc_of_match[] = {
>> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra210-pmc" },
>> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra132-pmc" },
>> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra124-pmc" },
>> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra114-pmc" },
>> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-pmc" },
>> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-pmc" },
>> + { }
>> +};
>> +
>> static int tegra_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct tegra_gpio_info *tgi;
>> struct tegra_gpio_bank *bank;
>> + struct device_node *np;
>> + struct irq_domain *parent_domain = NULL;
>> unsigned int gpio, i, j;
>> int ret;
>>
>> @@ -612,8 +700,15 @@ static int tegra_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> tgi->ic.irq_set_type = tegra_gpio_irq_set_type;
>> tgi->ic.irq_shutdown = tegra_gpio_irq_shutdown;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>> - tgi->ic.irq_set_wake = tegra_gpio_irq_set_wake;
>> + tgi->ic.irq_set_wake = irq_chip_set_wake_parent;
> This doesn't seem right. What about tegra_gpio_irq_set_wake()? If it's
> no longer needed, just remove it. But then, what about the extra logic
> in that function that causes the interrupts to be enabled during
> suspend? Is that no longer necessary? Maybe that's no longer needed on
> Tegra210, but what about other Tegra generations?
>
> Thierry
>
Missed this. Will fix in next version
>> #endif
>> + np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, tegra_pmc_of_match);
>> + if (np) {
>> + parent_domain = irq_find_host(np);
>> + of_node_put(np);
>> + if (!parent_domain)
>> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>> + }
>>
>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, tgi);
>>
>> @@ -625,9 +720,11 @@ static int tegra_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> if (!tgi->bank_info)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> - tgi->irq_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(pdev->dev.of_node,
>> - tgi->gc.ngpio,
>> - &irq_domain_simple_ops, NULL);
>> + tgi->irq_domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0,
>> + tgi->gc.ngpio,
>> + pdev->dev.of_node,
>> + &tegra_gpio_irq_domain_ops,
>> + &tgi->gc);
>> if (!tgi->irq_domain)
>> return -ENODEV;
>>
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists