On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:09:29AM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On 23/11/2023 18:43, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > +static int wcd9390_interrupt_callback(struct sdw_slave *slave,
> > > + struct sdw_slave_intr_status *status)
> > > +{
> > > + struct wcd939x_sdw_priv *wcd = dev_get_drvdata(&slave->dev);
> > > + struct irq_domain *slave_irq = wcd->slave_irq;
> > > + u32 sts1, sts2, sts3;
> > > +
> > > + do {
> > > + handle_nested_irq(irq_find_mapping(slave_irq, 0));
> > > + regmap_read(wcd->regmap, WCD939X_DIGITAL_INTR_STATUS_0, &sts1);
> > > + regmap_read(wcd->regmap, WCD939X_DIGITAL_INTR_STATUS_1, &sts2);
> > > + regmap_read(wcd->regmap, WCD939X_DIGITAL_INTR_STATUS_2, &sts3);
> > > +
> > > + } while (sts1 || sts2 || sts3);
> > > +
> > > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > > +}
> > We do this in the other Qualcomm drivers but it doesn't seem ideal to
> > just ignore the interrupts.
> It seems we simply ignore IRQs that are not mapped in the regmap_irq,
> what would be the ideal way to handle this ?
I don't understnad what "this" is here. Why even register an interrupt
handler here? What is the regmap_irq you are referring to here and why
would an interrupt handler here be related to it?
> > > +static int wcd939x_sdw_component_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
> > > + void *data)
> > > +{
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void wcd939x_sdw_component_unbind(struct device *dev,
> > > + struct device *master, void *data)
> > > +{
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static const struct component_ops wcd939x_sdw_component_ops = {
> > > + .bind = wcd939x_sdw_component_bind,
> > > + .unbind = wcd939x_sdw_component_unbind,
> > > +};
> > Do these need to be provided if they can legitimately be empty?
> AFAIK yes, component code will crash if those are not defined.
> I'll add a comment explaining whey they are no-op.
If the framework can genuninely have empty callbacks here the framework
should be updated to make the callbacks optional.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
