On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Gregory CLEMENT
<gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The Armada 37xx SoCs can handle interrupt through GPIO. However it can
> only manage the edge ones.
>
> The way the interrupt are managed are classical so we can use the generic
> interrupt chip model.
>
> The only unusual "feature" is that many interrupts are connected to the
> parent interrupt controller. But we do not take advantage of this and use
> the chained irq with all of them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
You need something in your Kconfig
doing select GPIOLIB_IRQCHIP unless there is
something I miss here.
> +#define IRQ_EN 0x0
> +#define IRQ_POL 0x08
> +#define IRQ_STATUS 0x10
This just cries out to me that there is a register 0x0c
and I bet it handles edges vs levels so you could also implement
level IRQs. Am I right?
> - aramda_37xx_update_reg(®, offset);
> + armada_37xx_update_reg(®, offset);
(...)
> - aramda_37xx_update_reg(®, offset);
> + armada_37xx_update_reg(®, offset);
These spelling fixes, do not do them in this patch, fix the first
patch adding them
instead. It's super-confusing. Applies everywhere.
> +static void armada_37xx_irq_handler(struct irq_desc *desc)
> +{
> + struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
> + struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
> + struct armada_37xx_pinctrl *info = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
> + struct irq_domain *d = gc->irqdomain;
> + int i;
> +
> + chained_irq_enter(chip, desc);
> + for (i = 0; i <= d->revmap_size / GPIO_PER_REG; i++) {
> + u32 status;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&info->irq_lock, flags);
> + status = readl_relaxed(info->base + IRQ_STATUS + 4 * i);
> + /* Manage only the interrupt that was enabled */
> + status &= readl_relaxed(info->base + IRQ_EN + 4 * i);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&info->irq_lock, flags);
> + while (status) {
> + u32 hwirq = ffs(status) - 1;
> + u32 virq = irq_linear_revmap(d, hwirq +
> + i * GPIO_PER_REG);
Use irq_find_mapping() instead please.
> + generic_handle_irq(virq);
> + status &= ~(1 << hwirq);
Why not status &= ~BIT(hwirq);
> + }
> + }
> + chained_irq_exit(chip, desc);
Apart from that nice, it re-reads status on every iteration which is
good.
> +static int armada_37xx_irqchip_register(struct platform_device *pdev,
> + struct armada_37xx_pinctrl *info)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np = info->dev->of_node;
> + int nrirqs = info->data->nr_pins;
> + struct gpio_chip *gc = &info->gpio_chip;
> + struct irq_chip *irqchip = &info->irq_chip;
> + struct resource res;
> + int ret, i, nr_irq_parent;
> +
> + for_each_child_of_node(info->dev->of_node, np) {
> + if (of_find_property(np, "gpio-controller", NULL)) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> + };
Now there is this thing again looping over the nodes.
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
ret may be used uninitialized here, if you loop over all nodes
and do not find any "gpio-controller".
The static code checks will just scream about this.
(Please fix in the other patch as well if present there.)
> + nr_irq_parent = of_irq_count(np);
> + spin_lock_init(&info->irq_lock);
> +
> + if (!nr_irq_parent) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid or no IRQ\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
What if it is > 1? That doesn't seem to work but will pass this
check silently.
> + ret = gpiochip_irqchip_add(gc, irqchip, 0,
> + handle_level_irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE);
If you also set up the handler in .set_type() you can assign
handle_bad_irq() here and let .set_type set the right handler
as e.g. drivers/gpio/gpio-pl061.c.
> + for (i = 0; i < nrirqs; i++) {
> + struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(gc->irq_base + i);
> +
> + d->mask = 1 << (i % GPIO_PER_REG);
> + }
What is this? It looks like a big hack. At least put in a fat
comment about what is going on and why.
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_irq_parent; i++) {
> + int irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i);
I think gpiochip_irqchip_add() will do this for you already,
as it calls irq_create_mapping() for all offsets which will call
irq_of_parse_and_map() am I right?
> +
> + if (irq < 0)
> + continue;
> +
> + gpiochip_set_chained_irqchip(gc, irqchip, irq,
> + armada_37xx_irq_handler);
> + }
So only this statement for each IRQ should be all right.
I think this driver needs a bit of tinkering and refining.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
