Linux kernel and device drivers for NXP i.MX platforms
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Donggeun Yoo <donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Frank.Li@kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: pf1550: fix which regulator is notified
Date: Sat,  5 Sep 2026 14:42:16 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260905054216.16986-1-donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260904111039.705FA1F00A3D@smtp.kernel.org>

On Fri, Sep 04, 2026 at 11:10:38AM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> This is a pre-existing issue, but returning IRQ_HANDLED when the driver
> completely fails to recognize the interrupt defeats the kernel's spurious
> interrupt detection.
>
> If the PMIC continuously asserts an unhandled fault, could the parent
> regmap-irq thread loop endlessly resulting in an interrupt storm and CPU
> lockup? Should this return IRQ_NONE instead?

The branch is not reachable.

probe() requests the handler for the eleven interrupts returned by
platform_get_irq(pdev, 0..PF1550_REGULATOR_IRQ_NR-1), without IRQF_SHARED,
and the lookup loop rebuilds that list with the same calls. The cell has no
.of_compatible, so platform_get_irq() returns the number mfd_add_device()
stored in the resource once, through irq_create_mapping(). Both loops see
the same numbers, so irq_type is always in range.

An interrupt the driver has no entry for cannot reach the handler either.
regmap_irq_thread() dispatches only the bits registered in the irq chip, so
there is nothing for the described storm to come from.

The point about handle_nested_irq() feeding note_interrupt() is right in
general, it just does not apply here.

Thanks,
Donggeun

      reply	other threads:[~2026-09-05  5:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-04 10:56 [PATCH] regulator: pf1550: fix which regulator is notified Donggeun Yoo
2026-09-04 11:10 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-05  5:42   ` Donggeun Yoo [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260905054216.16986-1-donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com \
    --to=donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=Frank.Li@kernel.org \
    --cc=imx@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox