Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: ingenic: Convert to immutable irq chip

[Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Aidan,

Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 17:47:19 +0100, Aidan MacDonald 
<aidanmacdonald.0x0@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >  Hi Aidan,
> >
> >  Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald
> >  <aidanmacdonald.0x0@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> > >  Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning:
> > >      "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!"
> > >  Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >  ---
> > >   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 
> > > ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > >   1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > >  diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c
> > >  b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c
> > >  index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644
> > >  --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c
> > >  +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c
> > >  @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl {
> > >   struct ingenic_gpio_chip {
> > >   	struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc;
> > >   	struct gpio_chip gc;
> > >  -	struct irq_chip irq_chip;
> > >   	unsigned int irq, reg_base;
> > >   };
> > >  @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct 
> > > irq_data
> > >  *irqd)
> > >   	struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc);
> > >   	int irq = irqd->hwirq;
> > >  +	gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq);
> > >  +
> > >   	if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770))
> > >   		ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true);
> > >   	else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740))
> > >  @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct 
> > > irq_data
> > >  *irqd)
> > >   		ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false);
> > >   	else
> > >   		ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false);
> > >  +
> > >  +	gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq);
> > >   }
> > >   static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd)
> > >  @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct 
> > > irq_data
> > >  *data)
> > >   	return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq);
> > >   }
> > >  +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = {
> > >  +	.name			= "gpio",
> > >  +	.irq_enable		= ingenic_gpio_irq_enable,
> > >  +	.irq_disable		= ingenic_gpio_irq_disable,
> > >  +	.irq_unmask		= ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask,
> > >  +	.irq_mask		= ingenic_gpio_irq_mask,
> > >  +	.irq_ack		= ingenic_gpio_irq_ack,
> > >  +	.irq_set_type		= ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type,
> > >  +	.irq_set_wake		= ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake,
> > >  +	.irq_request_resources	= ingenic_gpio_irq_request,
> > >  +	.irq_release_resources	= ingenic_gpio_irq_release,
> > >  +	.flags			= IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE,
> > >  +};
> > >  +
> > >   static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc,
> > >   		int pin, int func)
> > >   {
> > >  @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct
> > >  ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc,
> > >   	if (!jzgc->irq)
> > >   		return -EINVAL;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release;
> > >  -	jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND;
> > >  -
> > >   	girq = &jzgc->gc.irq;
> > >  -	girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip;
> > >  +	gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip);
> >
> >  This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that?
> >
> >  You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is
> >  jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip;
> >  jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label;
> >  gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip);
> >
> >  Thoughts?
> >
> >  Cheers,
> >  -Paul
>
> I wondered that myself, but it doesn't seem to affect anything except
> what is displayed in /proc/interrupts. Is the name used anywhere else
> where it might cause confusion?

I don't really know. If it only really affects the display in 
/proc/interrupts then I'm fine with it. In doubt, I'd prefer to keep 
the existing names.

> The only similar case I could find was pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c where
> microchip_sgpio_register_bank() is called in a loop and registers the
> same irq chip repeatedly, so it's probably(?) okay to do this here. It
> seems to defeat the point of immutable irqchips if they just have to 
> be
> copied anyway...

The point of immutable irqchips is that they aren't modified by the 
core, if I understand it correctly. Immutable doesn't mean it has to be 
static const.

> (btw, I did remove jzgc->irq_chip -- or did I miss something?)

Oops, missed that.

Cheers,
-Paul

> Best regards,
> Aidan
>
> > >   	girq->parent_handler = ingenic_gpio_irq_handler;
> > >   	girq->num_parents = 1;
> > >   	girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*girq->parents),
> > >  --
> > >  2.35.1