On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 2:22 AM Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 01:38:30AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > This edge setting should come from the device tree not > > the driver. Also, most device trees sets this to the > > falling edge, which is contradictory to what is hardcoded. > > I see there are 2 possibilities: > > 1. The driver has never worked > 2. DT interrupt annotation is wrong. > > It would be nice to know if we are dealing with 1 or 2, as in case of #2 > we need to adjust DTSes before this patch can be applied. I looked closer and unfortunately the mess and confusion is bizarre. The DTS files we know of are: arch/arm/boot/dts/am3517-som.dtsi - rising arch/arm/boot/dts/imx28-tx28.dts - falling arch/arm/boot/dts/imx35-eukrea-cpuimx35.dtsi - low arch/arm/boot/dts/imx51-eukrea-cpuimx51.dtsi - low arch/arm/boot/dts/imx53-tx53-x03x.dts - falling arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi - falling arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-tx6.dtsi - none arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6ul-tx6ul.dtsi - none arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d-nitrogen7.dts - falling arch/arm/boot/dts/logicpd-som-lv.dtsi - rising arch/arm/boot/dts/logicpd-torpedo-baseboard.dtsi - rising arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi - falling arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n900.dts - rising arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som-om44.dtsi - low arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp15xx-dhcom-som.dtsi - falling We can assume that some of this is the result of board engineers introducing inverters on the board as is custom, so the flags are actually correct when set to falling, just that we don't model the inverter. In the case of imx6qdl-tx6 and imx6ul-tx6ul with "none" IRQ type I assume this flag in the driver is actually necessary for the device to work at all. In the cases where rising is set, the addition of the flag is plain tautology, just setting what is already set. In the cases where falling are set the interrupts will arrive on both edges (if the hardware can provide that, which is not always the case) and as a result fire twice as many interrupts as they should, probably with zero effect on the second IRQ, just reporting nothing. The combination with active low is weird. I wonder what happens there. I am just confused now and have no idea what to do about it... But I just CC all the Freescale and OMAP people who seem to maintain these DTS files so they can clarify how well assigned these edges, none and active low (!) IRQs are. Yours, Linus Walleij
