From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: Add possibility to mask which GPIOs are added to IRQ domain Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 17:07:58 +0100 Message-ID: <57DAC75E.5080203@arm.com> References: <20160915155210.94413-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:40602 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751798AbcIOQIC (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:08:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160915155210.94413-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org To: Mika Westerberg , Linus Walleij Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Phidias Chiang , Anisse Astier , Heikki Krogerus , Yu C Chen , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mika, On 15/09/16 16:52, Mika Westerberg wrote: > When using GPIO irqchip helpers to setup irqchip for a gpiolib based > driver, it is not possible to select which GPIOs to add to the IRQ domain. > Instead it just adds all GPIOs which is not always desired. For example > there might be GPIOs that for some reason just cannot be used as interrupts > at all. > > To make this possible we add valid_mask to each gpio_chip and by default > assume all GPIOs can be used as interrupts. Drivers can then tune this > using clear_bit() or similar before they call gpiochip_irqchip_add(). > > Suggested-by: Linus Walleij > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg > --- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > index 53ff25ac66d8..d84c23b47f44 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > @@ -1186,6 +1186,18 @@ int gpiochip_add_data(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data) > if (status) > goto err_remove_chip; > } > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_GPIOLIB_IRQCHIP > + chip->valid_mask = kcalloc(BITS_TO_LONGS(chip->ngpio), sizeof(long), > + GFP_KERNEL); Do we really want to make this a mandatory thing? In most cases, I'd expect this valid_mask to have all bits set, so you might as well not allocate it at all in that case (and only allocate it if you actually need it). > + if (!chip->valid_mask) > + return -ENOMEM; You really want to revise your error handling here. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...