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
