From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>,
Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support ROHM BD96801 scalable PMIC
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 16:15:56 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b6279be8-cf7d-4608-b556-3c01587f0d43@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eb03ec33-0627-4986-be04-8e35da390d6b@sirena.org.uk>
Hi Mark,
On 4/4/24 15:09, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 10:26:34AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>
>> 1. Should we be able to have more than 1 IRQ domain / device?
>> 2. Should regmap_irq support having more than 1 HWIRQ
>
> I would expect each parent interrupt to show up as a separate remap_irq.
>
>> then it seems that reading the IRQ information from the /proc/interrupts
>> works as expected. Here I am making a wild guess that the name of the domain
>> is used as a key for some data-lookups, and having two domains with a same
>> name will either overwrite something or cause wrong domain data to be
>> fetched. (This is just guessing for now).
>
> So if we arrange to supply a name when we register multiple domains
> things should work fine?
Thanks for taking the time to look at my questions :)
I have been debugging this thing whole day today, without getting too
far :) It seems there is something beyond the name collision though.
After I tried adding '-1' to the end of the other domain name to avoid
the debugfs name collision I managed to do couple of successful runs -
after which I reported here that problem seems to be just the naming.
Soon after sending that mail I hit the oops again even though the naming
was fixed.
Further debugging shows that the desc->action->name for the last 28
'errb' IRQs get corrupted. This might point more to the IRQ requester
side - so I need to further study the BD96801 driver side as well as the
regulator_irq_helper. I'm having the creeping feeling that at the end of
the day I need to find the guilty one from the mirror :)
But yes, creating 2 regmap-IRQ controllers for one device seems to
generate naming conflict in the debugfs - so unless I'm mistaken, with
the current regmap-IRQ we can't have more than 1 regmap-IRQ entity for a
single device.
Just please give me some more time to see if I find the cause of the
corruption and I hope I can write more concrete description. For now it
was enough for me to hear having more than 1 IRQ domain / device is not
something on the "DON'T DO THIS" -list.
Yours,
-- Matti
--
Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland
~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-04 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-02 13:07 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support ROHM BD96801 scalable PMIC Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-02 13:07 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: ROHM BD96801 PMIC regulators Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-02 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] dt-bindings: mfd: bd96801 PMIC core Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-02 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] mfd: support ROHM BD96801 " Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-11 14:38 ` Lee Jones
2024-04-12 5:40 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-12 5:50 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-12 7:23 ` Lee Jones
2024-04-12 8:58 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-17 12:24 ` Lee Jones
2024-04-02 13:11 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] watchdog: ROHM BD96801 PMIC WDG driver Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-02 16:15 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-04-02 17:11 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 6:34 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-03 12:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 12:47 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-03 13:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-04-02 13:12 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] MAINTAINERS: Add ROHM BD96801 'scalable PMIC' entries Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-04 7:26 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support ROHM BD96801 scalable PMIC Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-04 12:09 ` Mark Brown
2024-04-04 13:15 ` Matti Vaittinen [this message]
2024-04-05 9:19 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-04-05 21:27 ` Mark Brown
2024-04-22 10:52 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-05-09 5:08 ` Mark Brown
2024-05-09 7:03 ` Matti Vaittinen
2024-05-09 15:38 ` Mark Brown
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=b6279be8-cf7d-4608-b556-3c01587f0d43@gmail.com \
--to=mazziesaccount@gmail.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=wim@linux-watchdog.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