[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdRC5_AUZttMqY8f9gBAct+q5sEUjqOAwVfdtCvwsE_dg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 11:40:12 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@...il.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Banajit Goswami <bgoswami@...eaurora.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...il.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, tharvey@...eworks.com,
rjones@...eworks.com, Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
orsonzhai@...il.com, baolin.wang7@...il.com, zhang.lyra@...il.com,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/49] regmap-irq: Fix inverted handling of unmask registers
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 10:08 PM Aidan MacDonald
<aidanmacdonald.0x0@...il.com> wrote:
>
> To me "unmask" suggests that we write 1s to the register when
> an interrupt is enabled. This also makes sense because it's the
> opposite of what the "mask" register does (write 1s to disable
> an interrupt).
>
> But regmap-irq does the opposite: for a disabled interrupt, it
> writes 1s to "unmask" and 0s to "mask". This is surprising and
> deviates from the usual way mask registers are handled.
>
> Additionally, mask_invert didn't interact with unmask registers
> properly -- it caused them to be ignored entirely.
>
> Fix this by making mask and unmask registers orthogonal, using
> the following behavior:
>
> * Mask registers are written with 1s for disabled interrupts.
> * Unmask registers are written with 1s for enabled interrupts.
>
> This behavior supports both normal or inverted mask registers
> and separate set/clear registers via different combinations of
> mask_base/unmask_base. The mask_invert flag is made redundant,
> since an inverted mask register can be described more directly
> as an unmask register.
>
> To cope with existing drivers that rely on the old "backward"
> behavior, check for the broken_mask_unmask flag and swap the
> roles of mask/unmask registers. This is a compatibility measure
> which can be dropped once the drivers are updated to use the
> new, more consistent behavior.
...
> + if (ret != 0)
if (ret)
> + dev_err(d->map->dev, "Failed to sync masks in %x\n",
> + reg);
...
> + if (ret != 0)
Ditto.
> + dev_err(d->map->dev, "Failed to sync masks in %x\n",
...
> + /*
> + * Swap role of mask_base and unmask_base if mask bits are inverted.
the roles
> + *
> + * Historically, chips that specify both mask_base and unmask_base
> + * got inverted mask behavior; this was arguably a bug in regmap-irq
> + * and there was no way to get the normal, non-inverted behavior.
> + * Those chips will set the broken_mask_unmask flag. They don't set
> + * mask_invert so there is no need to worry about interactions with
> + * that flag.
> + */
Reading this comment perhaps the code needs a validator part that will
issue a WARN_ON / dev_warn() / etc in case where the above is not
satisfied?
...
> + if (ret != 0) {
if (ret)
> + dev_err(map->dev, "Failed to set masks in 0x%x: %d\n",
> + reg, ret);
...
> + if (ret != 0) {
Ditto.
> + dev_err(map->dev, "Failed to set masks in 0x%x: %d\n",
> + reg, ret);
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists