lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] Fix shared irq trigger-flags conflict when old irqaction uses IRQF_TRIGGER_NONE
From
Date
Hi Hans,

On 09/04/17 20:59, Hans de Goede wrote:
> While writing a driver for the INT0002 ACPI device found on Intel
> Bay and Cherry Trail devices I hit the following error:
>
> "genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000084 (INT0002) vs. 00000080 (acpi)"
>
> This is caused by drivers/acpi/osl.c first doing:
>
> request_irq(irq, acpi_irq, IRQF_SHARED, "acpi", acpi_irq)
>
> While the irqdata for the irq contains no trigger flags, resulting
> in an irqaction with IRQF_TRIGGER_NONE.
>
> And then the INT0002 driver I'm working on calling platform_get_irq
> which does: irqd_set_trigger_type(irqd, r->flags & IORESOURCE_BITS);
>
> And then request_irq(irq, ..., IRQF_SHARED, ...) on the irq returned
> by platform_get_irq causes the error quoted above.
>
> Arguably the genirq code should not hit the shared irq trigger-flags
> mismatch code if the old irqaction has IRQF_TRIGGER_NONE as flags.
>
> This patch is an attempt at fixing this, but I'm not sure it is the
> right fix, hence it RFC status.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> ---
> kernel/irq/manage.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> index a4afe5c..24e5eef 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> @@ -1212,8 +1212,13 @@ __setup_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc, struct irqaction *new)
> * set the trigger type must match. Also all must
> * agree on ONESHOT.
> */
> + unsigned int old_msk = old->flags & IRQF_TRIGGER_MASK;
> +
> + if (!old_msk)
> + old_msk = irqd_get_trigger_type(&desc->irq_data);
> +
> if (!((old->flags & new->flags) & IRQF_SHARED) ||
> - ((old->flags ^ new->flags) & IRQF_TRIGGER_MASK) ||
> + ((old_msk ^ new->flags) & IRQF_TRIGGER_MASK) ||
> ((old->flags ^ new->flags) & IRQF_ONESHOT))
> goto mismatch;
>
>

I'm afraid you're just papering over the issue here, as you leave the
"old" descriptor in an inconsistent state w.r.t. the "new" descriptor.

My view is that the old irq_desc should be "upgraded" to the new trigger
configuration, because they are sharing a line and must have compatible
behaviours. NONE is effectively a wildcard, and the second interrupt
request should turn this wildcard into the real thing.

The opposite case also exists (request a LEVEL interrupt first, then a
NONE), and should be resolved the same way (NONE becomes LEVEL).

Thoughts?

M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-10 12:13    [W:0.090 / U:4.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site