[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 15:09:19 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] gpio: msc313: MStar MSC313 GPIO driver
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 3:19 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 2020-11-10 14:02, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> Probably nothing more than setting the callback to
> >> irq_chip_set_affinity_parent,
> >
> > Hm, is this something all GPIO irqchips used on SMP systems
> > should be doing? Or just hierarchical ones?
>
> Probably only the hierarchical ones. I'd expect the non-hierarchical
> GPIOs to be muxed behind a single interrupt, which makes it impossible
> to move a single GPIO around, and moving the mux interrupt would break
> userspace's expectations that interrupts move independently of each
> others.
I found two suspects and sent patches. I think I might have some
more candidates down in pinctrl. I do have some hierarchical IRQ
that is on UP systems, I suppose these are not affected.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists