Re: BUG? genirq: irq 14 uses trigger mode 8; requested 0

[Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 04:44:00PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:24:38PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> > Hi Mika,
> > 
> > On 01/11/16 13:02, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I started seeing following messages on Intel Broxton when the
> > > pinctrl/GPIO driver [1] loads:
> > > 
> > >   [    0.645786] genirq: irq 14 uses trigger mode 8; requested 0
> > > 
> > > The driver shares interrupt with other GPIO "communities" or banks so it
> > > uses request_irq() instead of irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(). The
> > > driver does not specify IRQ flags as those come from ACPI resources.
> > > 
> > > This started happen after commit 4b357daed698 ("genirq: Look-up trigger
> > > type if not specified by caller").
> > > 
> > > I think this is what happens:
> > > 
> > >   1. ACPI platform sets up the interrupt according what is in the _CRS
> > >   of the GPIO device. This ends up setting trigger type for irq_data of
> > >   the irq.
> > > 
> > >   2. First GPIO device is found and the driver calls request_irq() which
> > >   calls __setup_irq() where shared == 0.
> > > 
> > >   3. Since new->flags is read back from irq_data we call __irq_set_trigger()
> > >   passing the flags.
> > > 
> > >   4. The parent IRQ chip, IO-APIC, does not have ->irq_set_type callback
> > >   so __irq_set_trigger() never calls irq_settings_set_trigger_mask() for
> > >   the desciptor.
> > >
> > >   5. The second GPIO device is found and this time shared == 1 so we
> > >   end up comparing nmsk with omsk where nmsk was read from irq_data
> > >   and omsk is read using irq_settings_get_trigger_mask().
> > > 
> > >   6. Because we never called irq_settings_set_trigger_mask() for the
> > >   descriptor, omsk is 0 and we print out a warning:
> > > 
> > >   [    0.645786] genirq: irq 14 uses trigger mode 8; requested 0
> > > 
> > > If I revert commit 4b357daed698 the warning goes away.
> > > 
> > > Do you have any ideas how to get rid of the warning properly?
> > 
> > May be I am misunderstanding something here, but if the parent does not have
> > a ->irq_set_type callback, then it would seem that the type for the
> > interrupt should be not specified/set in the ACPI _CRS for the GPIO device,
> > right?
> 
> Not sure.
> 
> Why the parent driver (IO-APIC) does not have ->irq_set_type callback is
> beyond me. I guess it might have something to do with the IRQ hierarchy
> domains it is part of.
> 
> When the ACPI core parses _CRS for the GPIO device it calls
> acpi_register_gsi() with the triggering flags from _CRS and that ends up
> calling acpi_register_gsi_ioapic() that programs the hardware
> accordingly. So we definitely need to have the type in _CRS.

Jon, Marc, 

Do you have any suggestions how to fix this other than reverting
4b357daed698 ("genirq: Look-up trigger type if not specified by
caller")?

Before that commit everything works fine.