On 09/23/2014 05:15 PM, Wang, Yalin wrote: > hi > > but it is not safe with a little problem, > when remove , should not assume physical irq start from 0, > i change like this, > store gpiochip->irq_base = first_irq; > > --- > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > index 15cc0bb..c5fb2c1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > @@ -517,14 +517,14 @@ static int gpiochip_to_irq(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset) > */ > static void gpiochip_irqchip_remove(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip) > { > - unsigned int offset; > - > + int i; > acpi_gpiochip_free_interrupts(gpiochip); > > /* Remove all IRQ mappings and delete the domain */ > if (gpiochip->irqdomain) { > - for (offset = 0; offset < gpiochip->ngpio; offset++) > - irq_dispose_mapping(gpiochip->irq_base + offset); > + for (i = 0; i < gpiochip->ngpio; i++) > + irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(gpiochip->irqdomain, > + gpiochip->irq_base + i)); No:) it should start from 0 irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(gpiochip->irqdomain, i)); irq_domain_add_simple() uses hwirq_base == 0 and current implementation of gpiolib irqchip helpers doesn't support setting of custom hwirq_base. > irq_domain_remove(gpiochip->irqdomain); > } > > @@ -596,6 +596,7 @@ int gpiochip_irqchip_add(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip, > gpiochip->irqchip = NULL; > return -EINVAL; > } > + gpiochip->irq_base = first_irq; > irqchip->irq_request_resources = gpiochip_irq_reqres; > irqchip->irq_release_resources = gpiochip_irq_relres; > > @@ -604,14 +605,10 @@ int gpiochip_irqchip_add(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip, > * any gpiochip calls. If the first_irq was zero, this is > * necessary to allocate descriptors for all IRQs. > */ > - for (offset = 0; offset < gpiochip->ngpio; offset++) { > - irq_base = irq_create_mapping(gpiochip->irqdomain, offset); > - if (offset == 0) > - /* > - * Store the base into the gpiochip to be used when > - * unmapping the irqs. > - */ > - gpiochip->irq_base = irq_base; > + if (first_irq == 0) { > + for (offset = 0; offset < gpiochip->ngpio; offset++) > + irq_base = irq_create_mapping(gpiochip->irqdomain, offset); > + > } > > acpi_gpiochip_request_interrupts(gpiochip); > > > ________________________________________ > From: Wang, Yalin > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:39 PM > To: Wang, Yalin; Grygorii Strashko; Linus Walleij > Cc: gnurou@xxxxxxxxx; linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH] gpiolib:change to use irq_alloc_descs_from to alloc virqs > > hi > > sorry, > i don't notice Grygorii's patch , > yes, this patch is more easy, > it is ok to fix this problem. > > Great! > ________________________________________ > From: Wang, Yalin > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:37 PM > To: Grygorii Strashko; Linus Walleij > Cc: gnurou@xxxxxxxxx; linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH] gpiolib:change to use irq_alloc_descs_from to alloc virqs > > Hi > > In fact, i don't encounter any problem about gpio code, > i just find this issue when i see the source code, > i feel it is not safe, so i make a patch for it. > > yes, you are right, > "irq_base" is used only twice in gpiolib code, > but it maybe used by some other drivers, > if remove it, some drivers will can't get virq base. > it should get it by find_irq_mapping(), but it is also ok. > > in fact , we can allow the virq are allocated one by one, > but this need change gpiochip_irqchip_remove( ) function, > it should not assume the virq are contentious, > i think both method are ok , > it is just decided by how you want design it :) > > To summarize, we should make gpiochip_irqchip_add() and > gpiochip_irqchip_remove() both work correctly. > > > ________________________________________ > From: Grygorii Strashko [grygorii.strashko@xxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 8:59 PM > To: Wang, Yalin; Linus Walleij > Cc: gnurou@xxxxxxxxx; linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib:change to use irq_alloc_descs_from to alloc virqs > > Hi Wang, > > On 09/23/2014 03:03 PM, Wang, Yalin wrote: >> hi >> >> this is because , here: >> >> gpiochip->irqdomain = irq_domain_add_simple(of_node, >> gpiochip->ngpio, first_irq, >> &gpiochip_domain_ops, gpiochip); >> >> >> irq_domain_add_simple() in this function, >> if (first_irq > 0) { >> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ)) { >> /* attempt to allocated irq_descs */ >> int rc = irq_alloc_descs(first_irq, first_irq, size, >> of_node_to_nid(of_node)); >> if (rc < 0) >> pr_info("Cannot allocate irq_descs @ IRQ%d, assuming pre-allocated\n", >> first_irq); >> } >> irq_domain_associate_many(domain, first_irq, 0, size); >> } >> >> if first_irq > 0 , it will allocate it , >> and make sure the return virq is equal to first_irq . >> so we don't need allocate it again . > > Could provide a little bit more information about issue you've observed, pls? > > As for me, you patch will completely disable Sparse IRQ feature :( > > Also, I'm sure that struct gpio_chip->irq_base field can > be removed from gpiolib irqchip code - GPIO drivers shouldn't use it also, > because otherwise they will be incompatible with Sparse IRQ feature. > > Now the "irq_base" is used only twice in gpiolib code and below diff should > allow to drop it completely from gpiolib code. > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > index 15cc0bb..81762ed 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > @@ -524,7 +524,7 @@ static void gpiochip_irqchip_remove(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip) > /* Remove all IRQ mappings and delete the domain */ > if (gpiochip->irqdomain) { > for (offset = 0; offset < gpiochip->ngpio; offset++) > - irq_dispose_mapping(gpiochip->irq_base + offset); > + irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(gpiochip->irqdomain, offset)); > irq_domain_remove(gpiochip->irqdomain); > } > > not tested. > > > >> ________________________________________ >> From: Linus Walleij [linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx] >> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 6:21 PM >> To: Wang, Yalin >> Cc: gnurou@xxxxxxxxx; linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib:change to use irq_alloc_descs_from to alloc virqs >> >> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Wang, Yalin <Yalin.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> this patch change use from irq_create_mapping to irq_alloc_descs_from, >>> use irq_create_mapping to alloc virq one by one is not safe, >>> it can't promise the allcated virqs are continuous, >>> in stead, we use irq_alloc_descs_from() to alloc virqs in one time, >>> so that the allocated virqs are in continuous bitmaps. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yalin Wang <yalin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> (...) >> >>> - for (offset = 0; offset < gpiochip->ngpio; offset++) { >>> - irq_base = irq_create_mapping(gpiochip->irqdomain, offset); >>> - if (offset == 0) >>> - /* >>> - * Store the base into the gpiochip to be used when >>> - * unmapping the irqs. >>> - */ >>> - gpiochip->irq_base = irq_base; >>> + if (first_irq > 0) { >>> + gpiochip->irq_base = first_irq; >> >> Wait is this safe? Now you assume all descriptors are pre-allocated >> and associated in this case, atleast explain what is going on. >> >>> + } else { >>> + gpiochip->irq_base = irq_alloc_descs_from(1, gpiochip->ngpio, >>> + of_node_to_nid(of_node)); >>> + irq_domain_associate_many(gpiochip->irqdomain, >>> + gpiochip->irq_base, 0, gpiochip->ngpio); >> >> This part looks OK. >> >> I'm holding this patch back until the above is clarified. >> >> Yours, >> Linus Walleij-- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > Best regards, > -grygorii-- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html