Re: [PATCH v2] irqchip/qcom-pdc: add support for v3.2 HW

[neil.armstrong@linaro.org]

On 23/08/2023 11:19, Maulik Shah (mkshah) wrote:
> Hi Neil,
> 
> On 8/23/2023 2:21 PM, neil.armstrong@linaro.org wrote:
>> On 23/08/2023 10:25, Maulik Shah (mkshah) wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 8/23/2023 1:16 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 23/08/2023 07:35, Maulik Shah (mkshah) wrote:
>>>>> Hi Neil,
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -142,8 +163,17 @@ static int qcom_pdc_gic_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
>>>>>>           return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>       }
>>>>>> -    old_pdc_type = pdc_reg_read(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq);
>>>>>> -    pdc_reg_write(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq, pdc_type);
>>>>>> +    if (pdc_version < PDC_VERSION_3_2) {
>>>>>> +        old_pdc_type = pdc_reg_read(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq);
>>>>>> +        pdc_reg_write(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq, pdc_type);
>>>>>> +    } else {
>>>>>> +        u32 val;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +        val = pdc_reg_read(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq);
>>>>>> +        old_pdc_type = val & IRQ_i_CFG_TYPE_MASK;
>>>>>> +        pdc_reg_write(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq,
>>>>>> +                  pdc_type | (val & IRQ_i_CFG_IRQ_ENABLE));
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>> While above is correct, i don't think we need version check in qcom_pdc_gic_set_type() as bits 0-2 are always for the type in old/new version as mentioned in v1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Adding one line after reading old_pdc_type should be good enough.
>>>>
>>>> Yes I understood, but while looking at the IRQ_i_CFG bits, I wanted to keep the original
>>>> driver behavior intact by setting remaining bits to 0.
>>>>
>>>> Adding this single line changes that behavior and keeps bits 3-31
>>>> to the default register value, which may have some consequences.
>>>>
>>>> If you consider it's an ok change, then I'll reduce it to this single line.
>>> Yes this ok change to have single line and should not have  any consequences.
>>
>> I also remember why, it's about the final check:
>>
>> 184         if (old_pdc_type != pdc_type)
>> 185                 irq_chip_set_parent_state(d, IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, false);
>>
>> We need to strip out remaining bits of old_pdc_type of this won't work as
>> expected, so I'll change it to :
>>
>> +       old_pdc_type = pdc_reg_read(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq);
>> +       pdc_type |= (old_pdc_type & ~IRQ_i_CFG_TYPE_MASK);
>> +       old_pdc_type &= IRQ_i_CFG_TYPE_MASK;
>> +       pdc_reg_write(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq, pdc_type);
>>
>> Is it ok for you ?
> 
> No.
> 
>          old_pdc_type = pdc_reg_read(IRQ_i_CFG, d->hwirq);
> 
> +       pdc_type |= (old_pdc_type & ~IRQ_i_CFG_TYPE_MASK);
> 
> Adding above suggested single line is sufficient to make final check properly compare both old_pdc_type and new pdc_type, right?
> 
> But with your above change, It will end up comparing only bits 0-2 of old_pdc_type with updated pdc_type (which just got the other bits (3 to 31) of IRQ_i_CFG register by the ORing it with old_pdc_type).

Oh yeah indeed it's right, I had my previous code in mind.

I'll stick with the single line then,

Thanks,
Neil

> 
> Thanks,
> Maulik