On Wed, 09 Feb 2022 23:30:55 +0000, Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 at 17:49, Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Instead of overloading the name field, use the relevant callback to > > output the device name. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c | 11 +++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c > > index 5be9866c2b3c..f29d9ccf858b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c > > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ > > #include <linux/of.h> > > #include <linux/platform_device.h> > > #include <linux/reset.h> > > +#include <linux/seq_file.h> > > #include <linux/spinlock.h> > > > > #include <linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h> > > @@ -1163,12 +1164,20 @@ static int starfive_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int trigger) > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static void starfive_irq_print_chip(struct irq_data *d, struct seq_file *p) > > +{ > > + struct starfive_pinctrl *sfp = starfive_from_irq_data(d); > > + > > + seq_printf(p, sfp->gc.label); > > +} > > + > > static struct irq_chip starfive_irq_chip = { > > .irq_ack = starfive_irq_ack, > > .irq_mask = starfive_irq_mask, > > .irq_mask_ack = starfive_irq_mask_ack, > > .irq_unmask = starfive_irq_unmask, > > .irq_set_type = starfive_irq_set_type, > > + .irq_print_chip = starfive_irq_print_chip, > > .flags = IRQCHIP_SET_TYPE_MASKED, > > }; > > The parent interrupt doesn't show up in /proc/interrupts anyway, so if > setting the name is considered abuse we can just drop the addition > above and just delete the two lines below. Are you sure this never appears? Is there a another irqchip stacked on top of this one? Could you please dump /sys/kernel/debug/irq/irqs/XX, where XX is an interrupt number using one of these GPIO pins? Please run it without this patch, as I just noticed that debugfs blindly uses the name. > The gpio framework seems to fill in default handlers in the struct > above, so unfortunately it can't yet be made const. Is this something > you intend to fix in the future? This is next on my list of things to address. The whole 'let's copy a whole irqchip structure and hijack random pointers' should not have happened, and it certainly is going to be an interesting ride. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.