On 2016/9/24 2:26, Jacob Chen wrote:
> From: Jacob Chen <jacob2.chen at rock-chips.com>
>
> In some drivers, disable_irq() call don't be symmetric with enable_irq()
> , disable_irq() will be called before call free_irq().
Which upstream drivers you refer to?
Shouldn't it be the unbalanced call for these drivers?
>
> But both disable_irq() and free_irq() will call rockchip_irq_gc_mask_set_bit,
> and clk_disable() will be called more times than clk_enable(), which will
> cause bugs.
>
> I think we can correct that by checking of mask.If mask is already set, do nothing.
>
Looks like a little hacky to me.
> Change-Id: If19912c7658253e15531c04db6c70fdbffd5960a
remove this.
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Chen <jacob2.chen at rock-chips.com>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> index c6c04ac..9a8804a 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> @@ -2334,8 +2334,12 @@ static void rockchip_irq_gc_mask_clr_bit(struct irq_data *d)
> void rockchip_irq_gc_mask_set_bit(struct irq_data *d)
> {
> struct irq_chip_generic *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + struct irq_chip_type *ct = irq_data_get_chip_type(d);
> struct rockchip_pin_bank *bank = gc->private;
>
> + if (*ct->mask_cache & d->mask)
> + return;
> +
> irq_gc_mask_set_bit(d);
> clk_disable(bank->clk);
> }
> --
> 2.7.4
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
>
--
Best Regards
Shawn Lin
