linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: joelf@ti.com (Joel Fernandes)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] RFC: interrupt consistency check for OF GPIO IRQs
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 02:00:34 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <522EC392.8070002@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51F8CC35.1070704@collabora.co.uk>

On 07/31/2013 03:35 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 01:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
>>>> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gpio-controller and
>>>> interrupt-controller, walk all children of the device tree,
>>>> check if these in turn reference the interrupt-controller, and
>>>> if they do, loop over the interrupts used by that child and
>>>> perform gpio_reques() and gpio_direction_input() on these,
>>>> making them unreachable from the GPIO side.
>>>
>>> Ugh, that's pretty awful, and it doesn't actually solve the root
>>> problem of the GPIO and IRQ subsystems not cooperating. It's also a
>>> very DT-centric solution even though we're going to see the exact same
>>> issue on ACPI machines.
>>
>> The problem is that the patches for OMAP that I applied
>> and now have had to revert solves it in an even uglier way,
>> leading to breaking boards, as was noticed.
>>
>> The approach in this patch has the potential to actually
>> work without regressing a bunch of boards...
>>
>> Whether this is a problem in ACPI or not remains to be seen,
>> but I'm not sure about that. Device trees allows for a GPIO line
>> to be used as an interrupt source and GPIO line orthogonally,
>> and that is the root of this problem. Does ACPI have the same
>> problem, or does it impose natural restrictions on such use
>> cases?
>>
> 
> I agree with Linus here. The problem is that GPIO controllers that can work as
> IRQ sources are treated in the kernel as if there where two separate controlers
> that are rather orthogonal: an irq_chip and a gpio_chip.
> But DT allows to use a GPIO line as an IRQ just by using an omap-gpio phandle as
> "interrupt-parent".
> 
> So, there should be a place where both irq_chip and gpio_chip has to be related
> somehow to properly configure a GPIO (request it and setting it as input) when
> used as an IRQ by DT.
> 
> My patch for OMAP used an irq_domain_ops .map function handler to configure the
> GPIO when a IRQ was mapped since that seemed to me as the best place to do it.
> This worked well in OMAP2+ platforms but unfortunately broke OMAP1 platforms
> since they are still using legacy domain mapping thus not call .map.

Just wondering- why .map not called for omap1? irq_create_mapping does seem to
call  -> irq_domain_associate which calls map function. For omap case, GPIO
driver does call irq_create_mapping, just like omap2+ no?

Further, if for any reason the .map is not called. Can you not call gpio_request
yourself direct in omap_gpio_chip_init function?

Does it really matter if you call gpio_request from .map or from the chip_init
function?

Also on a different note.. this would call gpio_request for *every* gpio line,
but isn't that what your original patch that got reverted was doing in
omap_gpio_chip_init:

+       if (!bank->chip.of_node)
+               for (j = 0; j < bank->width; j++)
+                       irq_create_mapping(bank->domain, j);

Just trying to understand your initial patch better.

Regards,

-Joel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-09-10  7:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1375101368-17645-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@linaro.org>
2013-07-30  4:30 ` [PATCH] RFC: interrupt consistency check for OF GPIO IRQs Grant Likely
2013-07-30 23:44   ` Linus Walleij
2013-07-31  8:35     ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-08-02  9:57       ` Alexander Holler
2013-08-02 15:35         ` Alexander Holler
2013-08-03  7:23           ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-10  7:00       ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2013-09-10 13:17         ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-09-10 15:00           ` Joel Fernandes
2013-09-10 15:48             ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-09-10 16:25               ` Joel Fernandes
2013-09-11  7:05             ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-11  7:16               ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-11  7:30                 ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-11  7:36                   ` Alexander Holler
2013-08-13  9:52     ` Lars Poeschel
2013-08-19 22:04     ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-08-21 22:02       ` Linus Walleij
2013-09-06 15:32         ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-09-11 15:30         ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-11 16:14           ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-09-11 17:42             ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-12  8:55               ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-12 10:11                 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-09-12 10:28                   ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-12 11:09                     ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-12 11:26                       ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-12 11:37                         ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-12 15:19                           ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-12 15:57                             ` Alexander Holler
2013-09-18  0:36                               ` Grant Likely
2013-10-20 12:41                                 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-10-20 15:51                                   ` Tony Lindgren
2013-10-20 21:35                                   ` Stephen Warren
2013-10-21 23:26                                     ` Laurent Pinchart

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=522EC392.8070002@ti.com \
    --to=joelf@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).