lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/9] irq/irq_sim: provide irq_sim_fire_type()
From
Date
On 12/02/2019 09:19, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> wt., 12 lut 2019 o 10:10 Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> napisał(a):
>>
>> On 29/01/2019 08:44, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
>>>
>>> Provide a more specialized variant of irq_sim_fire() that allows to
>>> specify the type of the fired interrupt. The type is stored in the
>>> dummy irq context struct via the set_type callback.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/irq_sim.h | 9 ++++++++-
>>> kernel/irq/irq_sim.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/irq_sim.h b/include/linux/irq_sim.h
>>> index b96c2f752320..647a6c8ffb31 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/irq_sim.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/irq_sim.h
>>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ struct irq_sim_work_ctx {
>>>
>>> struct irq_sim_irq_ctx {
>>> bool enabled;
>>> + unsigned int type;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct irq_sim {
>>> @@ -37,7 +38,13 @@ int irq_sim_init(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int num_irqs);
>>> int devm_irq_sim_init(struct device *dev, struct irq_sim *sim,
>>> unsigned int num_irqs);
>>> void irq_sim_fini(struct irq_sim *sim);
>>> -void irq_sim_fire(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset);
>>> +void irq_sim_fire_type(struct irq_sim *sim,
>>> + unsigned int offset, unsigned int type);
>>> int irq_sim_irqnum(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset);
>>>
>>> +static inline void irq_sim_fire(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset)
>>> +{
>>> + irq_sim_fire_type(sim, offset, IRQ_TYPE_DEFAULT);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> #endif /* _LINUX_IRQ_SIM_H */
>>> diff --git a/kernel/irq/irq_sim.c b/kernel/irq/irq_sim.c
>>> index 2bcdbab1bc5a..e3160b5e59b8 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/irq/irq_sim.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/irq/irq_sim.c
>>> @@ -25,6 +25,15 @@ static void irq_sim_irqunmask(struct irq_data *data)
>>> irq_ctx->enabled = true;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int irq_sim_set_type(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int type)
>>> +{
>>> + struct irq_sim_irq_ctx *irq_ctx = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
>>> +
>>> + irq_ctx->type = type;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static void irq_sim_handle_irq(struct irq_work *work)
>>> {
>>> struct irq_sim_work_ctx *work_ctx;
>>> @@ -107,6 +116,7 @@ int irq_sim_init(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int num_irqs)
>>> sim->chip.name = "irq_sim";
>>> sim->chip.irq_mask = irq_sim_irqmask;
>>> sim->chip.irq_unmask = irq_sim_irqunmask;
>>> + sim->chip.irq_set_type = irq_sim_set_type;
>>>
>>> sim->work_ctx.pending = bitmap_zalloc(num_irqs, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> if (!sim->work_ctx.pending) {
>>> @@ -192,21 +202,29 @@ irq_sim_get_ctx(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset)
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> - * irq_sim_fire - Enqueue an interrupt.
>>> + * irq_sim_fire_type - Enqueue an interrupt.
>>> *
>>> * @sim: The interrupt simulator object.
>>> * @offset: Offset of the simulated interrupt which should be fired.
>>> + * @type: Type of the fired interrupt. Must be one of the following:
>>> + * IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING, IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING,
>>> + * IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH, IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH,
>>> + * IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW, IRQ_TYPE_DEFAULT
>>> */
>>> -void irq_sim_fire(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset)
>>> +void irq_sim_fire_type(struct irq_sim *sim,
>>> + unsigned int offset, unsigned int type)
>>> {
>>> struct irq_sim_irq_ctx *ctx = irq_sim_get_ctx(sim, offset);
>>>
>>> - if (ctx->enabled) {
>>> + /* Only care about relevant flags. */
>>> + type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
>>> +
>>> + if (ctx->enabled && (ctx->type & type)) {
>>
>> I wonder how realistic this is, given that you do not track the release
>> of a level. In short, mo matter what the type is, you treat everything
>> as edge.
>>
>> What is the point of this?
>>
>
> When userspace wants to monitor GPIO line interrupts, the GPIO
> framework requests a threaded interrupt with IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING,
> IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING or both. The testing module tries to act like real
> hardware and so if we pass only one of the *_TRIGGER_* flags, we want
> the simulated interrupt of corresponding type to be fired.

Well, that's not how HW works.

>
> Another solution - if you don't like this one - would be to have more
> specialized functions: irq_sim_fire_rising() and
> irq_sim_fire_falling(). How about that?

I think you're missing the point. So far, your API has been "an
interrupt has fired", no matter what the trigger is, and that's fine.
That's just modeling the output of an abstract interrupt controller into
whatever the irqsim is simulating.

Now, what you're exposing is "this is how the line changed". Which is an
entirely different business, as you're now exposing the device output
line. Yes, you can model it with raising/falling, but you need at least
resampling for level interrupts, and actual edge detection (raising
followed by raising only generates a single interrupt, while
raising-falling-raising generates two).

At the moment, I don't see any of that so I seriously doubt the validity
of the approach.

Thanks,

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-12 11:28    [W:0.073 / U:6.896 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site