lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] pinctrl: intel: Clear interrupt status in unmask callback
On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 12:45:39PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> Commit a939bb57cd47 ("pinctrl: intel: implement gpio_irq_enable") was
> added because clearing interrupt status bit is required to avoid
> unexpected behavior.
>
> Turns out the unmask callback also needs the fix, which can solve weird
> IRQ triggering issues on I2C touchpad ELAN1200.

> -static void intel_gpio_irq_enable(struct irq_data *d)
> -{
> - struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> - struct intel_pinctrl *pctrl = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
> - const struct intel_community *community;
> - const struct intel_padgroup *padgrp;
> - int pin;
> -
> - pin = intel_gpio_to_pin(pctrl, irqd_to_hwirq(d), &community, &padgrp);
> - if (pin >= 0) {
> - unsigned int gpp, gpp_offset, is_offset;
> - unsigned long flags;
> - u32 value;
> -
> - gpp = padgrp->reg_num;
> - gpp_offset = padgroup_offset(padgrp, pin);
> - is_offset = community->is_offset + gpp * 4;
> -
> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pctrl->lock, flags);
> - /* Clear interrupt status first to avoid unexpected interrupt */
> - writel(BIT(gpp_offset), community->regs + is_offset);
> -
> - value = readl(community->regs + community->ie_offset + gpp * 4);
> - value |= BIT(gpp_offset);
> - writel(value, community->regs + community->ie_offset + gpp * 4);
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pctrl->lock, flags);
> - }
> -}
> -
> static void intel_gpio_irq_mask_unmask(struct irq_data *d, bool mask)
> {
> struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> @@ -963,6 +934,11 @@ static void intel_gpio_irq_mask_unmask(struct irq_data *d, bool mask)
> reg = community->regs + community->ie_offset + gpp * 4;
>
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pctrl->lock, flags);
> +
> + /* Clear interrupt status first to avoid unexpected interrupt */

> + if (!mask)

Can we do this unconditionally?

> + writel(BIT(gpp_offset), community->regs + community->is_offset + gpp * 4);

I would rather prefer to follow the below pattern, like

reg = ...;
writel(..., reg);

or, to decrease calculus under spin lock, something like

reg = ->regs + gpp * 4;

writel(..., reg + is_offset);

readl(reg + ie_offset);

etc.

> +
> value = readl(reg);
> if (mask)
> value &= ~BIT(gpp_offset);
> @@ -1106,7 +1082,6 @@ static irqreturn_t intel_gpio_irq(int irq, void *data)
>
> static struct irq_chip intel_gpio_irqchip = {
> .name = "intel-gpio",

> - .irq_enable = intel_gpio_irq_enable,

Is it possible scenario when IRQ enable is called, but not masking callbacks?
For _AEI or GPE?

> .irq_ack = intel_gpio_irq_ack,
> .irq_mask = intel_gpio_irq_mask,
> .irq_unmask = intel_gpio_irq_unmask,

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-26 23:49    [W:0.110 / U:16.280 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site