Re: [PATCH] gpio: siox: indicate exclusive support of threaded IRQs

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 08:50:45PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> handle_nested_irq() does not care. It cares about thread context,
>> external reentrancy protection for the same nested interrupt and that
>> the nested interrupt has a thread handler.
>> 
>> The latter is what goes belly up because w/o that threaded bit set the
>> GPIO core fails to set nested thread. So if a consumer requests an
>> interrupt with request_any_context_irq() then that fails to select
>> thread mode which means the threaded handler is not set causing
>> handle_nested_irq() to fail.
>
> For a caller of request_threaded_irq() that passes a relevant hardirq
> handler the hardirq handler is never called but request_threaded_irq()
> doesn't fail. The handler is just replaced by irq_nested_primary_handler
> in __setup_irq(). Is that a bug? (I didn't test, just read the code, so I
> might have missed something.)

Depends on what the threaded handler expects what the primary handler
has done. It might just work or not :)

> Trying to be constructive, here is my suggested changelog:
>
> 	gpio: siox: explicitly only support threaded irqs
>
> 	The gpio-siox driver uses handle_nested_irq() to implement its
> 	interrupt support. This is only capable to handle threaded irq
> 	actions. For a hardirq action it triggers a NULL pointer oops.
> 	(It calls action->thread_fn which is NULL then.)
>
> 	So prevent registration of a hardirq action by setting
> 	gpio_irq_chip::threaded to true.
>
> Does this address all your concerns?

LGTM

> Is this bad enough to justify sending this patch to stable?

Yes, a Cc: stable and a Fixes: tag is justified.

Thanks,

        tglx