From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Jander <david.jander@protonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Input: gpio_keys.c: Enable use with non-local
 GPIO chips.
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:17:01 +0100
Message-ID: <20120316091701.4ee5f380@archvile>
References: <1308042491-20203-1-git-send-email-david@protonic.nl>
	<1308042491-20203-4-git-send-email-david@protonic.nl>
	<20120316072004.GB16291@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from protonic.xs4all.nl ([213.84.116.84]:10529 "EHLO
	protonic.xs4all.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753265Ab2CPIe6 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-input@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 16 Mar 2012 04:34:58 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20120316072004.GB16291@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: David Jander <david@protonic.nl>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>, linux-input@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:20:04 -0700
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:08:11AM +0200, David Jander wrote:
> > Use a threaded interrupt handler in order to permit the handler to use
> > a GPIO driver that causes things like I2C transactions being done inside
> > the handler context.
> > Also, gpio_keys_init needs to be declared as a late_initcall, to make sure
> > all needed GPIO drivers have been loaded if the drivers are built into the
> > kernel.
> 
> Don't want to resurrect the whole initcall discussion, but could you
> tell me again why the interrup handler needs to be threaded? We do not
> access hardware from it, hardware is accessed from workqueue context.
> Here is the ISR in its entirety:

Sorry, the reason described is apparently not very clear. The real reason seems
to be that I would like this driver to work with I2C GPIO expanders, and its
the GPIO expanders "interrupt controller" which has itself a threaded handler
(due to I2C transfers done in it to ack an IRQ). So this is actually a nested
and threaded interrupt controller (because the IRQ line of the GPIO expander
is connected to a different GPIO acting itself also as interrupt line).
In irq/manage.c, function __setup_irq():

...
	/*
	 * Check whether the interrupt nests into another interrupt
	 * thread.
	 */
	nested = irq_settings_is_nested_thread(desc);
	if (nested) {
		if (!new->thread_fn) {
			ret = -EINVAL;
			goto out_mput;
		}
...

This is were requesting a non-threaded IRQ from this GPIO controller will fail.

I know this is not a trivial setup, but IMHO it is very useful (for
connecting keyboards), and a nice demonstration of the powerful features this
GPIO driver has :-)

> static irqreturn_t gpio_keys_isr(int irq, void *dev_id)
> {
>         struct gpio_button_data *bdata = dev_id;
>         const struct gpio_keys_button *button = bdata->button;
> 
>         BUG_ON(irq != gpio_to_irq(button->gpio));
> 
>         if (bdata->timer_debounce)
>                 mod_timer(&bdata->timer,
>                         jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(bdata->timer_debounce));
>         else
>                 schedule_work(&bdata->work);
> 
>         return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
> 
> It looks to me that non-threaded handler would work as well? Or
> gpio_to_irq() can sleep with certain chips?

Not in my case. I just checked again. If I change request_threaded_irq() to
request_irq(), I get this:

...
[    6.409810] gpio-keys gpio_keys.0: Unable to claim irq 0; error -22
[    6.416106] gpio-keys: probe of gpio_keys.0 failed with error -22
...

This error -22 (-EINVAL) is returned from __setup_irq() (see above).

BTW: The connections of CPU-GPIO -> IRQ of PCA9539 -> GPIO -> gpio_key is
entirely done in the device tree, which is also sort of cool ;-)

Best regards,

-- 
David Jander
Protonic Holland.