From: Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@v3.sk>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/mmp: only touch the PJ4 & FIQ bits on enable/disable
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:37:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <10639e018803dd2b7efa0a99ca78df1a533fdb4c.camel@v3.sk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc85f7e6-fc78-9e7c-258e-a0a60d195686@arm.com>
On Wed, 2018-12-19 at 18:29 +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 19/12/2018 17:28, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> > On an OLPC XO 1.75 machine, the "security processor" handles the GPIO 71
> > and 72 interrupts. Don't reset the "route to SP" bit (4).
> >
> > I'm just assuming the bit 4 is the "route to SP" bit -- it fixes the
> > SP-based keyboard for me and <mach-mmp/regs-icu.h> defines
> > ICU_INT_ROUTE_SP_IRQ to be 1 << 4. When asked for a data sheet, Marvell
> > was not helpful.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@v3.sk>
> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> >
> > ---
> > Changes since v2:
> > - Correct subsystem maintainers on Cc (irqchip)
> >
> > Changes since v1:
> > - Adjusted wording & ack from Pavel
> >
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-mmp.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mmp.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mmp.c
> > index 25f32e1d7764..1ed38f9f1d0a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mmp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mmp.c
> > @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static const struct mmp_intc_conf mmp_conf = {
> > static const struct mmp_intc_conf mmp2_conf = {
> > .conf_enable = 0x20,
> > .conf_disable = 0x0,
> > - .conf_mask = 0x7f,
> > + .conf_mask = 0x60,
>
> You seem to have identified that ICU_INT_ROUTE_PJ4_IRQ and
> ICU_INT_ROUTE_PJ4_FIQ bits are the only ones to be touched. So why don't
> you use these constants? This number soup is quite unhealthy.
Yeah, but those #defines live in mach-mmp, so some moving would be
necessary. If you indeed prefer that then I can follow up with a patch
that does that.
> It'd be good to Cc some of the folks who initially wrote this code
> (Haojian Zhuang, Eric Miao -- assuming they are still around) and get
> some testing on a non OLPC platform, just to make sure there is no
> regression due to this. I have the nagging feeling that this could be a
> platform specific thing rather than a universal setting.
They've been Cc'd on previous spins of the patch (and tens of other
mmp-related patches that were in circulation lately), but they never
returned a response. It is safe to assume they're AWOL.
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
Thanks
Lubo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-19 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-19 17:28 Lubomir Rintel
2018-12-19 18:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-12-19 18:37 ` Lubomir Rintel [this message]
2018-12-19 18:52 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-12-20 6:43 ` Lubomir Rintel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=10639e018803dd2b7efa0a99ca78df1a533fdb4c.camel@v3.sk \
--to=lkundrak@v3.sk \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®