On 29/04/2019 09:59, Lokesh Vutla wrote:
>
>
> On 29/04/19 2:17 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 23/04/2019 11:00, Lokesh Vutla wrote:
>>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * ti_sci_inta_set_type() - Update the trigger type of the irq.
>>>> + * @data: Pointer to corresponding irq_data
>>>> + * @type: Trigger type as specified by user
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Note: This updates the handle_irq callback for level msi.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Return 0 if all went well else appropriate error.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static int ti_sci_inta_set_type(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int type)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(data->irq);
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * .alloc default sets handle_edge_irq. But if the user specifies
>>>> + * that IRQ is level MSI, then update the handle to handle_level_irq
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (type & IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH)
>>>> + desc->handle_irq = handle_level_irq;
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>
>>>
>>> Returning error value is causing request_irq to fail, so still returning 0. Do
>>> you suggest any other method to handle this?
>>
>> But that is the very point, isn't it? If you pass the wrong triggering
>> type to request_irq, it *must* fail. What you should have is something like:
>>
>> switch (type & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK) {
>> case IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH:
>> desc->handle_irq = handle_level_irq;
>> return 0;
>> case IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING:
>> return 0;
>> default:
>> return -EINVAL;
>> }
>>
>> (adjust as necessary).
>>
>> What's wrong with this?
>
> I get it. Will fix it in next version. I also got the firmware update as well.
> If you are okay with rest of the series, I want to post the next version with
> the firmware update.
Then post it now, and I'll review that. I'd rather look at the latest
than providing feedback on something that has already changed.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
