Re: [PATCH net-next] i2c: tegra: runtime PM is not IRQ-safe

["Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 04:15:07PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> 
> On 17/02/2026 16:04, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 03:55:47PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> > > Hi Russell,
> > > 
> > > Mikko recently posted this fix [0]. Hopefully, this also works?
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > Jon
> > > 
> > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260217-i2c-dpaux-irqsafe-v2-1-635a4c43b1a7@nvidia.com/T/#u
> > 
> > Looks like it probably would do, but I note that it fixes two problems.
> > What happened to "fix one problem with one patch" ?
> > 
> >  From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
> > 
> >    Solve only one problem per patch.  If your description starts to get
> >    long, that's a sign that you probably need to split up your patch.
> >    See :ref:`split_changes`.
> 
> Yes we should always follow that rule. However, in this case, I believe that
> the build time dependency on the PINCTRL subsystem was only exposed by
> adding the 'i2c_dev->dev->pins'. Unless I am misunderstanding ...

Yes, it looks like it.

However, I wonder why the dependency has to be complicated.

ARCH_TEGRA in both arm64 and arm selects PINCTRL, so we can assume that
PINCTRL will be set for ARCH_TEGRA. So:

 config I2C_TEGRA
 	tristate "NVIDIA Tegra internal I2C controller"
 	depends on ARCH_TEGRA || (COMPILE_TEST && (ARC || ARM || ARM64 || M68K || RISCV || SUPERH || SPARC))
+	depends on PINCTRL

is a shorter way of writing this, and it makes sense - pinctrl isn't
required because we're doing a compile test, it's required because
the driver itself fundamentally requires it with this change whether
or not we're doing a compile test.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!