Hi,
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 10:09 PM Maulik Shah <mkshah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> On 7/9/2020 2:46 AM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > As per Qualcomm, there is a PDC hardware issue (with the specific IP
> > rev that exists on sc7180) that causes the PDC not to work properly
> > when configured to handle dual edges.
> >
> > Let's work around this by emulating only ever letting our parent see
> > requests for single edge interrupts on affected hardware.
> >
> > Fixes: e35a6ae0eb3a ("pinctrl/msm: Setup GPIO chip in hierarchy")
> > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > As far as I can tell everything here should work and the limited
> > testing I'm able to give it shows that, in fact, I can detect both
> > edges.
> >
> > Please give this an extra thorough review since it's trying to find
> > the exact right place to insert this code and I'm not massively
> > familiar with all the frameworks.
> >
> > If someone has hardware where it's easy to stress test this that'd be
> > wonderful too. The board I happen to have in front of me doesn't have
> > any easy-to-toggle GPIOs where I can just poke a button or a switch to
> > generate edges. My testing was done by hacking the "write protect"
> > GPIO on my board into gpio-keys as a dual-edge interrupt and then
> > sending commands to our security chip to toggle it--not exactly great
> > for testing to make sure there are no race conditions if the interrupt
> > bounces a lot.
> >
> > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.h | 4 ++
> > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7180.c | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 85 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c
> > index 83b7d64bc4c1..45ca09ebb7b3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c
> > @@ -860,6 +860,79 @@ static void msm_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *d)
> > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pctrl->lock, flags);
> > }
> >
> > +/**
> > + * msm_gpio_update_dual_edge_parent() - Prime next edge for IRQs handled by parent.
> > + * @d: The irq dta.
> > + *
> > + * This is much like msm_gpio_update_dual_edge_pos() but for IRQs that are
> > + * normally handled by the parent irqchip. The logic here is slightly
> > + * different due to what's easy to do with our parent, but in principle it's
> > + * the same.
> > + */
> > +static void msm_gpio_update_dual_edge_parent(struct irq_data *d)
> > +{
> > + struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > + struct msm_pinctrl *pctrl = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
> > + const struct msm_pingroup *g = &pctrl->soc->groups[d->hwirq];
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + int loop_limit = 100;
> > + unsigned int val;
> > + unsigned int type;
> > +
> > + /* Read the value and make a guess about what edge we need to catch */
> > + val = msm_readl_io(pctrl, g) & BIT(g->in_bit);
> > + type = val ? IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING : IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
> > +
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pctrl->lock, flags);
> can you please move this spinlock covering above two lines as well?
I could, but it wouldn't accomplish anything would it? We're reading
the status of the pin straight from memory mapped registers. Grabbing
a spinlock won't stop the pin from toggling.
...but from Mark's review I'll likely change the locking a bit anyway.
> > + do {
> > + /* Set the parent to catch the next edge */
> > + irq_chip_set_type_parent(d, type);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Possibly the line changed between when we last read "val"
> > + * (and decided what edge we needed) and when set the edge.
> > + * If the value didn't change (or changed and then changed
> > + * back) then we're done.
> > + */
> > + val = msm_readl_io(pctrl, g) & BIT(g->in_bit);
> > + if (type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING) {
> > + if (!val)
> > + break;
> > + type = IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING;
> > + } else if (type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING) {
> > + if (val)
> > + break;
> > + type = IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
> > + }
> > + } while (loop_limit-- > 0);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pctrl->lock, flags);
> > +
> > + if (!loop_limit)
> > + dev_err(pctrl->dev, "dual-edge irq failed to stabilize\n");
>
> you will never enter this if condtion since loop_limit will become
> negative value in above do..while loop.
>
> need to update this check to if (loop_limit <= 0)
>
> other than above comment this change looks good to me.
Good catch, thanks!
> Reviewed-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Tested-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks,
> Maulik
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void msm_gpio_handle_dual_edge_parent_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
> > +{
> > + struct irq_data *d = &desc->irq_data;
> > +
> > + /* Make sure we're primed for the next edge */
> > + msm_gpio_update_dual_edge_parent(d);
> > +
> > + /* Pass on to the normal interrupt handler */
> > + handle_fasteoi_irq(desc);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool msm_gpio_needs_dual_edge_parent_workaround(struct irq_data *d,
> > + unsigned int type)
> > +{
> > + struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > + struct msm_pinctrl *pctrl = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
> > +
> > + return type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH &&
> > + pctrl->soc->wakeirq_dual_edge_errata && d->parent_data &&
> > + test_bit(d->hwirq, pctrl->skip_wake_irqs);
> > +}
> > +
> > static int msm_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
> > {
> > struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > @@ -868,6 +941,13 @@ static int msm_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
> > unsigned long flags;
> > u32 val;
> >
> > + if (msm_gpio_needs_dual_edge_parent_workaround(d, type)) {
> > + irq_set_handler_locked(d, msm_gpio_handle_dual_edge_parent_irq);
> > + msm_gpio_update_dual_edge_parent(d);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (d->parent_data)
> > irq_chip_set_type_parent(d, type);
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.h b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.h
> > index 9452da18a78b..7486fe08eb9b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.h
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.h
> > @@ -113,6 +113,9 @@ struct msm_gpio_wakeirq_map {
> > * @pull_no_keeper: The SoC does not support keeper bias.
> > * @wakeirq_map: The map of wakeup capable GPIOs and the pin at PDC/MPM
> > * @nwakeirq_map: The number of entries in @wakeirq_map
> > + * @wakeirq_dual_edge_errata: If true then GPIOs using the wakeirq_map need
> > + * to be aware that their parent can't handle dual
> > + * edge interrupts.
> > */
> > struct msm_pinctrl_soc_data {
> > const struct pinctrl_pin_desc *pins;
> > @@ -128,6 +131,7 @@ struct msm_pinctrl_soc_data {
> > const int *reserved_gpios;
> > const struct msm_gpio_wakeirq_map *wakeirq_map;
> > unsigned int nwakeirq_map;
> > + bool wakeirq_dual_edge_errata;
> > };
> >
> > extern const struct dev_pm_ops msm_pinctrl_dev_pm_ops;
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7180.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7180.c
> > index 1b6465a882f2..1d9acad3c1ce 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7180.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7180.c
> > @@ -1147,6 +1147,7 @@ static const struct msm_pinctrl_soc_data sc7180_pinctrl = {
> > .ntiles = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7180_tiles),
> > .wakeirq_map = sc7180_pdc_map,
> > .nwakeirq_map = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7180_pdc_map),
> > + .wakeirq_dual_edge_errata = true,
> > };
> >
> > static int sc7180_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> --
> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
>
