[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8c4d01b4-ff14-9807-303e-2e2571af12e2@sedsystems.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:02:26 -0600
From: Robert Hancock <hancock@...systems.ca>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@...inx.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
shubhrajyoti.datta@...inx.com, sgoud@...inx.com,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
git@...inx.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] gpio: xilinx: Add interrupt support
On 2020-07-23 12:03 p.m., Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * xgpio_xlate - Translate gpio_spec to the GPIO number and flags
>> + * @gc: Pointer to gpio_chip device structure.
>> + * @gpiospec: gpio specifier as found in the device tree
>> + * @flags: A flags pointer based on binding
>> + *
>> + * Return:
>> + * irq number otherwise -EINVAL
>> + */
>> +static int xgpio_xlate(struct gpio_chip *gc,
>> + const struct of_phandle_args *gpiospec, u32 *flags)
>> +{
>> + if (gc->of_gpio_n_cells < 2) {
>> + WARN_ON(1);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON(gpiospec->args_count < gc->of_gpio_n_cells))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + if (gpiospec->args[0] >= gc->ngpio)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + if (flags)
>> + *flags = gpiospec->args[1];
>> +
>> + return gpiospec->args[0];
>> +}
>
> This looks like a very standart xlate function for GPIO. Why do you
> need to open-code it?
Indeed, this seems the same as the of_gpio_simple_xlate callback which
is used if no xlate callback is specified, so I'm not sure why this is
necessary?
>
> ...
>
>> +/**
>> + * xgpio_irq_ack - Acknowledge a child GPIO interrupt.
>
>> + * This currently does nothing, but irq_ack is unconditionally called by
>> + * handle_edge_irq and therefore must be defined.
>
> This should go after parameter description(s).
>
>> + * @irq_data: per irq and chip data passed down to chip functions
>> + */
>
> ...
>
>> /**
>> + * xgpio_irq_mask - Write the specified signal of the GPIO device.
>> + * @irq_data: per irq and chip data passed down to chip functions
>
> In all comments irq -> IRQ.
>
>> + */
>> +static void xgpio_irq_mask(struct irq_data *irq_data)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + struct xgpio_instance *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(irq_data);
>> + int irq_offset = irqd_to_hwirq(irq_data);
>> + int index = xgpio_index(chip, irq_offset);
>> + int offset = xgpio_offset(chip, irq_offset);
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&chip->gpio_lock, flags);
>> +
>
>> + chip->irq_enable[index] &= ~BIT(offset);
>
> If you convert your data structure to use bitmaps (and respective API) like
>
> #define XILINX_NGPIOS 64
> ...
> DECLARE_BITMAP(irq_enable, XILINX_NGPIOS);
> ...
>
> it will make code better to read and understand. For example, here it
> will be just
> __clear_bit(offset, chip->irq_enable);
>
>> + dev_dbg(chip->gc.parent, "Disable %d irq, irq_enable_mask 0x%x\n",
>> + irq_offset, chip->irq_enable[index]);
>
> Under spin lock?! Hmm...
>
>> + if (!chip->irq_enable[index]) {
>> + /* Disable per channel interrupt */
>> + u32 temp = xgpio_readreg(chip->regs + XGPIO_IPIER_OFFSET);
>> +
>> + temp &= ~BIT(index);
>> + xgpio_writereg(chip->regs + XGPIO_IPIER_OFFSET, temp);
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chip->gpio_lock, flags);
>> +}
>
> ...
>
>> + for (index = 0; index < num_channels; index++) {
>> + if ((status & BIT(index))) {
>
> If gpio_width is the same among banks, you can use for_each_set_bit()
> here as well.
>
> ...
>
>> + for_each_set_bit(bit, &all_events, 32) {
>> + generic_handle_irq(irq_find_mapping
>> + (chip->gc.irq.domain, offset + bit));
>
> Strange indentation. Maybe a temporary variable helps?
>
> ...
>
>> + chip->irq = platform_get_irq_optional(pdev, 0);
>> + if (chip->irq <= 0) {
>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "GPIO IRQ not set\n");
>
> Why do you need an optional variant if you print an error anyway?
>
>> + } else {
>
>
> ...
>
>> + chip->gc.irq.parents = (unsigned int *)&chip->irq;
>> + chip->gc.irq.num_parents = 1;
>
> Current pattern is to use devm_kcalloc() for it (Linus has plans to
> simplify this in the future and this will help him to find what
> patterns are being used)
>
--
Robert Hancock
Senior Hardware Designer
SED Systems, a division of Calian Ltd.
Email: hancock@...systems.ca
Powered by blists - more mailing lists