mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: luojiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>, <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	<Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>, <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linuxarm@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] gpio: dwapb: mask/unmask IRQ when disable/enable it
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 16:59:21 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <63f7dcc4-a924-515a-2fea-31ec80f3353e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201130112250.GK4077@smile.fi.intel.com>


On 2020/11/30 19:22, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:36:19PM +0800, Luo Jiaxing wrote:
>> The mask and unmask registers are not configured in dwapb_irq_enable() and
>> dwapb_irq_disable(). In the following situations, the IRQ will be masked by
>> default after the IRQ is enabled:
>>
>> mask IRQ -> disable IRQ -> enable IRQ
>>
>> In this case, the IRQ status of GPIO controller is inconsistent with it's
>> irq_data too. For example, in __irq_enable(), IRQD_IRQ_DISABLED and
>> IRQD_IRQ_MASKED are both clear, but GPIO controller do not perform unmask.
> Sounds a bit like a papering over the issue which is slightly different.
> Can you elaborate more, why ->irq_mask() / ->irq_unmask() are not being called?


Sure, The basic software invoking process is as follows:

Release IRQ:
free_irq() -> __free_irq() -> irq_shutdown() ->__irq_disable()

Disable IRQ:
disable_irq() -> __disable_irq_nosync() -> __disable_irq -> irq_disable 
-> __irq_disable()

As shown before, both will call __irq_disable(). The code of it is as 
follows:

if (irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data)) {
     if (mask)
         mask_irq(desc);

} else {
         irq_state_set_disabled(desc);
             if (desc->irq_data.chip->irq_disable) {
desc->irq_data.chip->irq_disable(&desc->irq_data);
                 irq_state_set_masked(desc);
             } else if (mask) {
                 mask_irq(desc);
     }
}

Because gpio-dwapb.c provides the hook function of irq_disable, 
__irq_disable() will directly calls chip->irq_disable() instead of 
mask_irq().

For irq_enable(), it's similar and the code is as follows:

if (!irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data)) {
     unmask_irq(desc);
} else {
     irq_state_clr_disabled(desc);
     if (desc->irq_data.chip->irq_enable) {
desc->irq_data.chip->irq_enable(&desc->irq_data);
         irq_state_clr_masked(desc);
     } else {
         unmask_irq(desc);
     }
}

Similarly, because gpio-dwapb.c provides the hook function of 
irq_enable, irq_enable() will directly calls chip->irq_enable() but does 
not call unmask_irq().


Therefore, the current handle is as follows:

API of IRQ:        |   mask_irq()             | disable_irq()            
|    enable_irq()

gpio-dwapb.c:  |   chip->irq_mask()   | chip->irq_diable()   |    
chip->irq_enable()

I do not know why irq_enable() only calls chip->irq_enable(). However, 
the code shows that irq_enable() clears the disable and masked flags in 
the irq_data state.

Therefore, for gpio-dwapb.c, I thinks ->irq_enable also needs to clear 
the disable and masked flags in the hardware register.





  reply	other threads:[~2020-12-01  9:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-30  9:36 Luo Jiaxing
2020-11-30 11:22 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-12-01  8:59   ` luojiaxing [this message]
2020-12-05 22:15     ` Serge Semin
2020-12-06 15:02       ` Linus Walleij
2020-12-06 18:50         ` Marc Zyngier
2020-12-07 13:10           ` luojiaxing
2021-01-06 10:24             ` Bartosz Golaszewski
     [not found]               ` <CAHp75VcFo2hc1kjP9jLxmCdN79rD2R4vCw2P8UssbWe2v4zwcw@mail.gmail.com>
2021-01-07 12:20                 ` Serge Semin
2020-12-07 13:04         ` luojiaxing
2020-12-07 12:44       ` luojiaxing
2020-12-05 21:58 ` Linus Walleij
2023-12-15  8:09   ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-12-15 10:24     ` Serge Semin
2023-12-15 10:56       ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-12-15 12:57         ` Serge Semin

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=63f7dcc4-a924-515a-2fea-31ec80f3353e@huawei.com \
    --to=luojiaxing@huawei.com \
    --cc=Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru \
    --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
    --cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    /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®