Hi Claudiu, On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 3:11 PM claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 14.03.2024 15:21, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 12:25 PM Claudiu <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Lockdep detects a possible deadlock as listed below. This is because it > >> detects the IA55 interrupt controller .irq_eoi() API is called from > >> interrupt context while configuration-specific API (e.g., .irq_enable()) > >> could be called from process context on resume path (by calling > >> rzg2l_gpio_irq_restore()). To avoid this, protect the call of > >> rzg2l_gpio_irq_enable() with spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore(). > >> With this the same approach that is available in __setup_irq() is mimicked > >> to pinctrl IRQ resume function. > > > > You mean __setup_irq() in kernel/irq/manage.c? > > Yes! > > > That one uses the raw spinlock methods? > > Yes! Would you prefer to have raw spinlock here, too? Most pin control driver needing protection in an irq_enable method use raw spinlock, so I think it makes sense to follow that. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds