Some background infos:
This patch fixes an issue when using max77620 gpio driver.
The issue is that, max77620 doesn't have a dedicated GPIO interrupt mask register.
If you want to mask a separate GPIO interrupt on max77620, you need to do that in
it's type register(starting from register address 0x36 - 0x3D).
So this means we can't find a proper register for "mask_base" property, while in current
regmap-irq.c, it updates mask registers assuming "mask_base" is always provided.
Maybe this patch is not the cleanest way to fix the issue, e.g: some chip's mask register
address is zero, in that case, could you help to suggest what is the right way?
Thanks,
Mark
On 1/14/2019 5:32 PM, Mark Zhang wrote:
> If client have not provided the mask base register then do not
> write into the mask register.
>
> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jinyoung Park <jinyoungp@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Venkat Reddy Talla <vreddytalla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Zhang <markz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/base/regmap/regmap-irq.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regmap-irq.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regmap-irq.c
> index d2d0014b0d23..330c1f7e9665 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/regmap/regmap-irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/regmap/regmap-irq.c
> @@ -108,6 +108,9 @@ static void regmap_irq_sync_unlock(struct irq_data *data)
> * suppress pointless writes.
> */
> for (i = 0; i < d->chip->num_regs; i++) {
> + if (!d->chip->mask_base)
> + continue;
> +
> reg = d->chip->mask_base +
> (i * map->reg_stride * d->irq_reg_stride);
> if (d->chip->mask_invert) {
> @@ -588,6 +591,9 @@ int regmap_add_irq_chip(struct regmap *map, int irq, int irq_flags,
> /* Mask all the interrupts by default */
> for (i = 0; i < chip->num_regs; i++) {
> d->mask_buf[i] = d->mask_buf_def[i];
> + if (!chip->mask_base)
> + continue;
> +
> reg = chip->mask_base +
> (i * map->reg_stride * d->irq_reg_stride);
> if (chip->mask_invert)
>
