linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] gpio: omap: Add omap_gpio_disable/enable

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <53d989ec-06b6-4337-aef7-81e651fab3e1@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 13:38:46 -0500
From: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>
CC: <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Bin Liu <b-liu@...com>,
        <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] gpio: omap: Add omap_gpio_disable/enable_irq
 calls

Hi Andrew,

On 10/11/24 2:07 PM, Andrew Davis wrote:
> On 10/11/24 12:33 PM, Judith Mendez wrote:
>> Add omap_gpio_disable_irq and omap_gpio_enable_irq
>> calls in gpio-omap.
>>
>> Currently, kernel cannot disable gpio interrupts in
>> case of a irq storm, so add omap_gpio_disable_irq
>> so that interrupts can be disabled/enabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bin Liu <b-liu@...com>
>> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> index 76d5d87e9681..913e6ece1238 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
>> @@ -711,6 +711,31 @@ static void omap_gpio_unmask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>>       raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
>>   }
>> +static void omap_gpio_set_irq(struct irq_data *d, bool enable)
>> +{
>> +    struct gpio_bank *bank = omap_irq_data_get_bank(d);
>> +    unsigned int offset = d->hwirq;
>> +    unsigned long flags;
>> +
>> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags);
>> +    omap_set_gpio_irqenable(bank, offset, enable);
>> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void omap_gpio_disable_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>> +{
>> +    bool enable = 1;
>> +
>> +    omap_gpio_set_irq(d, !enable);
> 
> Seems like an odd way to make "false", why not:
> 
> omap_gpio_set_irq(d, false);

Thanks for your review, you are right, but I will
be reverting to the original patch format. Where we do
not used wrappers function around omap_gpio_set_irq().

~ Judith

> 
> Andrew
> 
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void omap_gpio_enable_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>> +{
>> +    bool enable = 1;
>> +
>> +    omap_gpio_set_irq(d, enable);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static void omap_gpio_irq_print_chip(struct irq_data *d, struct 
>> seq_file *p)
>>   {
>>       struct gpio_bank *bank = omap_irq_data_get_bank(d);
>> @@ -723,6 +748,8 @@ static const struct irq_chip omap_gpio_irq_chip = {
>>       .irq_shutdown = omap_gpio_irq_shutdown,
>>       .irq_mask = omap_gpio_mask_irq,
>>       .irq_unmask = omap_gpio_unmask_irq,
>> +    .irq_disable = omap_gpio_disable_irq,
>> +    .irq_enable = omap_gpio_enable_irq,
>>       .irq_set_type = omap_gpio_irq_type,
>>       .irq_set_wake = omap_gpio_wake_enable,
>>       .irq_bus_lock = omap_gpio_irq_bus_lock,
>> @@ -737,6 +764,8 @@ static const struct irq_chip 
>> omap_gpio_irq_chip_nowake = {
>>       .irq_shutdown = omap_gpio_irq_shutdown,
>>       .irq_mask = omap_gpio_mask_irq,
>>       .irq_unmask = omap_gpio_unmask_irq,
>> +    .irq_disable = omap_gpio_disable_irq,
>> +    .irq_enable = omap_gpio_enable_irq,
>>       .irq_set_type = omap_gpio_irq_type,
>>       .irq_bus_lock = omap_gpio_irq_bus_lock,
>>       .irq_bus_sync_unlock = gpio_irq_bus_sync_unlock,