From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pinctrl: actions: Add interrupt support for OWL S900
 SoC
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 22:27:23 +0530
Message-ID: <20180603165723.GA14907@Mani-XPS-13-9360>
References: <20180602165415.30956-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
 <20180602165415.30956-4-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
 <CAHp75Ve8ZCbEqnYK0KqtCHQm-EOUWRSyMzi51P+3_7brtXq6dA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75Ve8ZCbEqnYK0KqtCHQm-EOUWRSyMzi51P+3_7brtXq6dA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>, =?utf-8?B?5YiY54Kc?= <liuwei@actions-semi.com>, mp-cs@actions-semi.com, 96boards@ucrobotics.com, devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>, amit.kucheria@linaro.org, linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, hzhang@ucrobotics.com, bdong@ucrobotics.com, Mani Sadhasivam <manivannanece23@gmail.com>, Thomas Liau <thomas.liau@actions-semi.com>, jeff.chen@actions-semi.com
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

Hi Andy,

On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:37:53AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 7:54 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam
> <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> > Add interrupt support for Actions Semi OWL S900 SoC.
> 
> > +       port = owl_gpio_get_port(pctrl, &gpio);
> > +       if (WARN_ON(port == NULL))
> > +               return;
> 
> At which circumstances the above possible?
> 

Only possible when the requested GPIO exceeds chip->ngpio. I know it is
a kind of redundant check, but it is good to have this during development.

> > +       port = owl_gpio_get_port(pctrl, &gpio);
> > +       if (WARN_ON(port == NULL))
> > +               return;
> 
> Ditto.
>

Same as above.

> > +       port = owl_gpio_get_port(pctrl, &gpio);
> > +       if (WARN_ON(port == NULL))
> > +               return;
> 
> Ditto.
>

Same as above.

> > +       port = owl_gpio_get_port(pctrl, &gpio);
> > +       if (WARN_ON(port == NULL))
> > +               return -ENODEV;
> 
> Ditto.
>

Same as above.

> 
> > +       for (i = 0; i < chip->ngpio; i++) {
> > +               irqno = irq_create_mapping(pctrl->domain, i);
> > +               irq_set_chip_and_handler(irqno, &owl_gpio_irq_chip,
> > +                                        handle_edge_irq);
> > +               irq_set_chip_data(irqno, pctrl);
> > +       }
> 
> I'm not sure the handle_edge_irq() is a correct handler here. It would
> be handle_bad_irq() until IRQ has been requested properly.
> No?
>

Hmmm, good question. Since the handler used in irq_set_chip_and_handler
is superseded by irq_set_chained_handler_and_data, this doesn't matter
anyway. But I would like to hear what Linus suggests here!

> > +/* GPIO TYPE Bit Definition */
> > +#define OWL_GPIO_INT_LEVEL_HIGH                0
> > +#define OWL_GPIO_INT_LEVEL_LOW         1
> > +#define OWL_GPIO_INT_EDGE_RISING       2
> > +#define OWL_GPIO_INT_EDGE_FALLING      3
> 
> > +#define OWL_GPIO_INT_MASK              3
> 
> GENMASK?
>

Ack.

Thanks,
Mani

> -- 
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko