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
| ||
|
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