From: Ernest Van Hoecke <ernestvanhoecke@gmail.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ernest Van Hoecke <ernest.vanhoecke@toradex.com>,
Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com>,
linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v1] Documentation: gpio: pca953x: clarify interrupt source detection
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 10:31:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260107093125.4053468-1-ernestvanhoecke@gmail.com> (raw)
From: Ernest Van Hoecke <ernest.vanhoecke@toradex.com>
There are multiple design tradeoffs and considerations in how the
PCA953x driver detects the source(s) of an interrupt. This driver
supports PCAL variants with input latching, a feature that is
constrained by the fact that the interrupt status and input port
registers cannot be read atomically. These limits and the design
decisions deserve an in-depth explanation.
Update the documentation to clarify these hardware limits and describe
how the driver determines pending interrupts, and how it makes use of
the PCAL input latching.
Signed-off-by: Ernest Van Hoecke <ernest.vanhoecke@toradex.com>
---
This documents behaviour implemented in a previously submitted patch and
bases some of the descriptions on parts of that commit message:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251217153050.142057-1-ernestvanhoecke@gmail.com/
---
Documentation/driver-api/gpio/pca953x.rst | 75 +++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 75 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/pca953x.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/pca953x.rst
index 4bd7cf1120cb..57e6c613c478 100644
--- a/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/pca953x.rst
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/gpio/pca953x.rst
@@ -383,6 +383,13 @@ disabled.
Currently the driver enables the latch for each line with interrupt
enabled.
+An interrupt status register records which pins triggered an interrupt.
+However, the status register and the input port register must be read
+separately; there is no atomic mechanism to read both simultaneously, so races
+are possible. Refer to the chapter `Interrupt source detection`_ to understand
+the implications of this and how the driver still makes use of the latching
+feature.
+
1. base offset 0x40, bank 2, bank offsets of 2^n
- pcal6408
- pcal6416
@@ -511,6 +518,74 @@ bits drive strength
Currently not supported by the driver.
+Interrupt source detection
+==========================
+
+When triggered by the GPIO expander's interrupt, the driver determines which
+IRQs are pending by reading the input port register.
+
+To be able to filter on specific interrupt events for all compatible devices,
+the driver keeps track of the previous input state of the lines, and emits an
+IRQ only for the correct edge or level. This system works irrespective of the
+number of enabled interrupts. Events will not be missed even if they occur
+between the GPIO expander's interrupt and the actual I2C read. Edges could of
+course be missed if the related signal level changes back to the value
+previously saved by the driver before the I2C read. PCAL variants offer input
+latching for that reason.
+
+PCAL input latching
+-------------------
+
+The PCAL variants have an input latch and the driver enables this for all
+interrupt-enabled lines. The interrupt is then only cleared when the input port
+is read out. These variants provide an interrupt status register that records
+which pins triggered an interrupt, but the status and input registers cannot be
+read atomically. If another interrupt occurs on a different line after the
+status register has been read but before the input port register is sampled,
+that event will not be reflected in the earlier status snapshot, so relying
+solely on the interrupt status register is insufficient.
+
+Thus, the PCAL variants also have to use the existing level-change logic.
+
+For short pulses, the first edge is captured when the input register is read,
+but if the signal returns to its previous level before this read, the second
+edge is not observed. As a result, successive pulses can produce identical
+input values at read time and no level change is detected, causing interrupts
+to be missed. Below timing diagram shows this situation where the top signal is
+the input pin level and the bottom signal indicates the latched value::
+
+ ─────┐ ┌──*───────────────┐ ┌──*─────────────────┐ ┌──*───
+ │ │ . │ │ . │ │ .
+ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
+ └──*──┘ │ └──*──┘ │ └──*──┘ │
+ Input │ │ │ │ │ │
+ ▼ │ ▼ │ ▼ │
+ IRQ │ IRQ │ IRQ │
+ . . .
+ ─────┐ .┌──────────────┐ .┌────────────────┐ .┌──
+ │ │ │ │ │ │
+ │ │ │ │ │ │
+ └────────*┘ └────────*┘ └────────*┘
+ Latched │ │ │
+ ▼ ▼ ▼
+ READ 0 READ 0 READ 0
+ NO CHANGE NO CHANGE
+
+To deal with this, events indicated by the interrupt status register are merged
+with events detected through the existing level-change logic. As a result:
+
+- short pulses, whose second edges are invisible, are detected via the
+ interrupt status register, and
+- interrupts that occur between the status and input reads are still
+ caught by the generic level-change logic.
+
+Note that this is still best-effort: the status and input registers are read
+separately, and short pulses on other lines may occur in between those reads.
+Such pulses can still be latched as an interrupt without leaving an observable
+level change at read time, and may not be attributable to a specific edge. This
+does not reduce detection compared to the generic path, but reflects inherent
+atomicity limitations.
+
Datasheets
==========
--
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-01-07 9:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-07 9:31 Ernest Van Hoecke [this message]
2026-01-07 15:26 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-01-08 9:50 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-09 10:08 ` Linus Walleij
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=20260107093125.4053468-1-ernestvanhoecke@gmail.com \
--to=ernestvanhoecke@gmail.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=brgl@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=ernest.vanhoecke@toradex.com \
--cc=francesco.dolcini@toradex.com \
--cc=linusw@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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®