Hi, On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 8:01 AM Maulik Shah <mkshah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Doug, > > On 12/12/2020 3:45 AM, Douglas Anderson wrote: > > In Linux, if a driver does disable_irq() and later does enable_irq() > > on its interrupt, I believe it's expecting these properties: > > * If an interrupt was pending when the driver disabled then it will > > still be pending after the driver re-enables. > > * If an edge-triggered interrupt comes in while an interrupt is > > disabled it should assert when the interrupt is re-enabled. > > > > If you think that the above sounds a lot like the disable_irq() and > > enable_irq() are supposed to be masking/unmasking the interrupt > > instead of disabling/enabling it then you've made an astute > > observation. Specifically when talking about interrupts, "mask" > > usually means to stop posting interrupts but keep tracking them and > > "disable" means to fully shut off interrupt detection. It's > > unfortunate that this is so confusing, but presumably this is all the > > way it is for historical reasons. > > > > Perhaps more confusing than the above is that, even though clients of > > IRQs themselves don't have a way to request mask/unmask > > vs. disable/enable calls, IRQ chips themselves can implement both. > > ...and yet more confusing is that if an IRQ chip implements > > disable/enable then they will be called when a client driver calls > > disable_irq() / enable_irq(). > > > > It does feel like some of the above could be cleared up. However, > > without any other core interrupt changes it should be clear that when > > an IRQ chip gets a request to "disable" an IRQ that it has to treat it > > like a mask of that IRQ. > > > > In any case, after that long interlude you can see that the "unmask > > and clear" can break things. Maulik tried to fix it so that we no > > longer did "unmask and clear" in commit 71266d9d3936 ("pinctrl: qcom: > > Move clearing pending IRQ to .irq_request_resources callback"), but it > > only handled the PDC case (it also had problems, but that's the > > subject of another patch). Let's fix this for the non-PDC case. > > > > From my understanding the source of the phantom interrupt in the > > non-PDC case was the one that could have been introduced in > > msm_gpio_irq_set_type(). Let's handle that one and then get rid of > > the clear. > > > > Fixes: 4b7618fdc7e6 ("pinctrl: qcom: Add irq_enable callback for msm gpio") > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > I don't have lots of good test cases here, so hopefully someone from > > Qualcomm can confirm that this works well for them and there isn't > > some other phantom interrupt source that I'm not aware of. > > > > Changes in v4: > > - ("pinctrl: qcom: Don't clear pending interrupts when enabling") split for v4. > > > > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c | 32 +++++++++++++----------------- > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c > > index 588df91274e2..f785646d1df7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c > > @@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ static void msm_gpio_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d) > > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pctrl->lock, flags); > > } > > > > -static void msm_gpio_irq_clear_unmask(struct irq_data *d, bool status_clear) > > +static void msm_gpio_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d) > > { > > struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d); > > struct msm_pinctrl *pctrl = gpiochip_get_data(gc); > > @@ -792,17 +792,6 @@ static void msm_gpio_irq_clear_unmask(struct irq_data *d, bool status_clear) > > > > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pctrl->lock, flags); > > > > - if (status_clear) { > > - /* > > - * clear the interrupt status bit before unmask to avoid > > - * any erroneous interrupts that would have got latched > > - * when the interrupt is not in use. > > - */ > > - val = msm_readl_intr_status(pctrl, g); > > - val &= ~BIT(g->intr_status_bit); > > - msm_writel_intr_status(val, pctrl, g); > > - } > > - > Removing above does not cover the case where GPIO IRQ do not have parent > PDC. > > Specifically, for edge IRQs during masking we donot clear > intr_raw_status_bit. > see below at msm_gpio_irq_mask() > > if (irqd_get_trigger_type(d) & IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_MASK) > val &= ~BIT(g->intr_raw_status_bit); > > we have to keep the bit set anyway so that edges are latched while the > line is masked. > > The problem is even when GPIO is set to some other function like > "mi2s_2" it can still sense the line at make > interrupt pending depending on the line toggle if intr_raw_status_bit is > left set. Ah, so it's the same problem as we have with the PDC. Makes sense. > I have thought of solution to this, > > 1) During msm_gpio_irq_mask() we keep intr_raw_status_bit set already in > today's code > This will make edges to latch when the line is masked. > so no change required for this. > > 2) During msm_pinmux_set_mux() if we set GPIO to anyother function than > GPIO interrupt mode, > we clear intr_raw_status_bit, so the interrupt cannot latch when GPIO is > used in other function. > Below snippet can be inserted in msm_pinmux_set_mux() > > val |= i << g->mux_bit; > msm_writel_ctl(val, pctrl, g); > > + if (i != gpio_func) { > + val = msm_readl_intr_cfg(pctrl, g); > + val &= ~BIT(g->intr_raw_status_bit); > + msm_writel_intr_cfg(val, pctrl, g); > + } > + > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pctrl->lock, flags); > > 3) During msm_gpio_irq_unmask(), if the intr_raw_status_bit is not set, > then clear the pending IRQ. > specifically setting this bit itself can cause the error IRQ, so clear > it when setting this. > > for edge IRQ, intr_raw_status_bit can only be cleared in > msm_pinmux_set_mux() so clearing pending > IRQ should not loose any edges since we know GPIO was used in other > function mode like mi2s_2 for > which we do not need to latch IRQs. > Below snippet can be inserted in msm_gpio_irq_unmask() > > + was_enabled = val & BIT(g->intr_raw_status_bit); > val |= BIT(g->intr_raw_status_bit); > val |= BIT(g->intr_enable_bit); > msm_writel_intr_cfg(val, pctrl, g); > > + if (!was_enabled) { > + val = msm_readl_intr_status(pctrl, g); > + val &= ~BIT(g->intr_status_bit); > + msm_writel_intr_status(val, pctrl, g); > + } > + > set_bit(d->hwirq, pctrl->enabled_irqs); > > This can cover the cases for which the GPIO do not have parent. I think your solution can be made to work, but I think also we can just use the exact same solution that I already came up with in patch #4. We can leave the "raw" bit alone and just mask the interrupt when we switch the mux, then clear the interrupt when we switch back. I've now combined the PDC/non-PDC cases and it actually turned out fairly clean I think. See what you think about v5. -Doug