On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 4:02 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> When IRQ domain is created for an ACPI case, the name of it becomes unknown-%d
> since for now it utilizes of_node member only and doesn't consider fwnode case.
> Convert IRQ domain creation code to utilize fwnode instead.
>
> Before/After the change on Intel Galileo Gen 2 with two GPIO (IRQ) controllers:
>
> unknown-1 ==> \_SB.PCI0.GIP0.GPO
> unknown-2 ==> \_SB.NIO3
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 28 ++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index 6827736ba05c..254d59b088fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> @@ -1457,9 +1457,9 @@ static int gpiochip_add_irqchip(struct gpio_chip *gc,
> struct lock_class_key *lock_key,
> struct lock_class_key *request_key)
> {
> + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = dev_fwnode(&gc->gpiodev->dev);
> struct irq_chip *irqchip = gc->irq.chip;
> - const struct irq_domain_ops *ops = NULL;
> - struct device_node *np;
> + const struct irq_domain_ops *ops;
> unsigned int type;
> unsigned int i;
>
> @@ -1471,7 +1471,6 @@ static int gpiochip_add_irqchip(struct gpio_chip *gc,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - np = gc->gpiodev->dev.of_node;
> type = gc->irq.default_type;
>
> /*
> @@ -1479,16 +1478,10 @@ static int gpiochip_add_irqchip(struct gpio_chip *gc,
> * used to configure the interrupts, as you may end up with
> * conflicting triggers. Tell the user, and reset to NONE.
> */
> - if (WARN(np && type != IRQ_TYPE_NONE,
> - "%s: Ignoring %u default trigger\n", np->full_name, type))
> + if (WARN(fwnode && type != IRQ_TYPE_NONE,
> + "%pfw: Ignoring %u default trigger\n", fwnode, type))
> type = IRQ_TYPE_NONE;
>
> - if (has_acpi_companion(gc->parent) && type != IRQ_TYPE_NONE) {
> - acpi_handle_warn(ACPI_HANDLE(gc->parent),
> - "Ignoring %u default trigger\n", type);
> - type = IRQ_TYPE_NONE;
> - }
Why is the above message not worth printing any more? If there is a
good enough reason, it would be good to mention it in the changelog.
> -
> if (gc->to_irq)
> chip_warn(gc, "to_irq is redefined in %s and you shouldn't rely on it\n", __func__);
>
> @@ -1504,15 +1497,10 @@ static int gpiochip_add_irqchip(struct gpio_chip *gc,
> return ret;
> } else {
> /* Some drivers provide custom irqdomain ops */
> - if (gc->irq.domain_ops)
> - ops = gc->irq.domain_ops;
> -
> - if (!ops)
> - ops = &gpiochip_domain_ops;
I'm guessing that the code above is replaced in order to avoid
initializing ops to NULL, but IMO that should be a separate patch or
at least the extra cleanup should be mentioned in the changelog.
Personally, I would do the essential change first and put all of the
tangentially related cleanups into a separate follow-up patch.
> - gc->irq.domain = irq_domain_add_simple(np,
> - gc->ngpio,
> - gc->irq.first,
> - ops, gc);
> + ops = gc->irq.domain_ops ?: &gpiochip_domain_ops;
> + gc->irq.domain = irq_domain_create_simple(fwnode, gc->ngpio,
> + gc->irq.first,
> + ops, gc);
> if (!gc->irq.domain)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> --
