On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 3:58 PM Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:22:28AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: ... > Sorry for a delay with a response to this issue. I had to give it a more thorough > thought since the problem is a bit more complex than it seemed originally. As I > see it now It might be wrong to implement the cases 2) and 3), but 1) is more > appropriate. > > First of all we need to note that GPIOlib framework provides the next parameters > to describe the IRQ-chip: > gc->irq.num_parents - number of parental IRQ numbers. > gc->irq.parents[] - array of parental IRQ numbers. > *gc->irq.valid_mask - a mask of IRQ/GPIO lines describing a valid IRQ. > *gc->irq.map - mapping of hw IRQ/GPIO ID -> parental IRQ numbers. > > Using that set we can handle any case of linear and sparse parental IRQs. Here > is how it can be implemented in the framework of DW APB GPIO controller. > > DW APB GPIO can be synthesized with two configs: > 1) Combined IRQ line (GPIO_INTR_IO == True), > 2) Multiple interrupt signals for each GPIO (GPIO_INTR_IO == False). > > Obviously the former case is trivial: > > IRQ_combined > ______^________ > /_ _ _ _ _ ___ _\ > |_|_|_|_|_|...|_| - GPIOs > > In that case > gc->irq.num_parents = 1; > gc->irq.parents[0] = IRQ_combined; > *gc->irq.valid_mask = GENMASK(ngpio - 1, 0); // This is done by the GPIOlib core itself. > > The later one (when multiple interrupt signals are involved) can be a bit more > complicated. It can be also split up into two cases: > 2a) One-on-one GPIO-IRQ mapping. > 2b) Sparse GPIO-IRQ mapping. > > It's straightforward to implement 2a): > > i1i2i3i4i5 ... iN > _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ > |_|_|_|_|_|...|_| - GPIOs > > In that case > gc->irq.num_parents = ngpio; > gc->irq.parents[] = {i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, ... iN}; > gc->irq.map = {i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, ... iN}; > *gc->irq.valid_mask = GENMASK(ngpio - 1, 0); > This case puzzles me. Why is it not NULL and 0 and actually you handle everything as a nested case? > The complication starts when we get to implementing 2b): > > i1 xi3i4 x ... iN > _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ > |_|_|_|_|_|...|_| - GPIOs So does this. Valid mask will define exactly GPIOs that are IRQs. So, we will handle only nested IRQs which are valid. > In order to cover this case we need to answer on two question. > Firstly how to get such platform config? I am not sure about ACPI, but > aside from straightforward platform_data-based setup such configuration > can be reached by setting up the "interrupts-extended" DT-property with > zeroed phandle. > > Ok, since it's possible to meet such platform config, we need to think > how to handle it and here is the second question. How to describe such > case in the framework of GPIOlib-IRQchip? > > So from my side it was wrong to set the sparse IRQs array to > gc->irq.parents. Instead I should have scanned the sparse IRQs array, > calculated the number of non-empty parental IRQs, created an array of linear > (non-sparse) IRQs, initialized *gc->irq.valid_mask in accordance with the > sparse parental IRQs array. In other words it was wrong to assume, that > each gc->irq.parents entry corresponds to the IRQ/GPIO line. The gc->irq.parents > array just describes the parental IRQs and nothing else. > > Shortly speaking here is how the GPIOlib IRQchip parameters should be > initialized in this case: > gc->irq.num_parents - number of valid parental IRQs. > gc->irq.parents - non-sparse, linear array of valid IRQs. > *gc->irq.valid_mask - mask initialized by means of the gc->irq.init_valid_mask() > callback, which indicates valid IRQ/GPIO IDs. > *gc->irq.map - sparse array of parental IRQ numbers (which I mistakenly tried to > pass through the gc->irq.parents pointer). > > After that GPIOlib IRQchip should work just fine without need to be patched > in order to check whether the passed parental IRQs are valid or not. > > Please correct me if I am wrong in some aspects of the solution described above. > I'll send a fix of the problem shortly. Maybe I'm missing something, but looks like you are solving the issue which is not so complex / doesn't exist. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko