Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] gpio: Add support for hierarchical IRQ domains

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2167 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:12:27PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 12:58:02PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 9:53 AM Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Me
> > 
> > > > Please drop this. The default .to_irq() should be good for everyone.
> > > > Also patch 2/2 now contains a identical copy of the gpiolib
> > > > .to_irq() which I suspect you indended to drop, actually.
> > >
> > > It's not actually identical to the gpiolib implementation. There's still
> > > the conversion to the non-linear DT representation for GPIO specifiers
> > > from the linear GPIO number space, which is not taken care of by the
> > > gpiolib variant. That's precisely the point why this patch makes it
> > > possible to let the driver override things.
> > 
> > OK something is off here, because the purpose of the irqdomain
> > is exactly to translate between different number spaces, so it should
> > not happen in the .to_irq() function at all.
> > 
> > Irqdomain uses .map() in the old variant and .translate() in the
> > hierarchical variant to do this, so something is skewed.
> > 
> > All .to_irq() should ever do is just call the irqdomain to do the
> > translation, no other logic (unless I am mistaken) so we should
> > be able to keep the simple .to_irq() logic inside gpiolib.
> 
> Well, that's exactly the problem that I'm trying to solve. The problem
> is that .translate() translates from the DT number space to the GPIO or
> IRQ number space. However, since gpiochip_to_irq() now wants to call the
> irq_create_fwspec_mapping() interface, it must convert from the offset
> (in GPIO space) into the DT number space, which is what that function
> expects.

Hm... I wonder if we even need this irq_create_fwspec_mapping() there.
Couldn't we just do an irq_create_mapping() since we already know which
one of the GPIO IRQ controller's interrupts we want to create a mapping
for? If we already convert to the GPIO number space in the .translate()
then the offset already corresponds to the one that we need to map, no?

I'll make a note to try that tomorrow.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]