From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
lee.jones@linaro.org, alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com,
k.kozlowski@samsung.com, broonie@kernel.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, a.zummo@towertech.it
Cc: cw00.choi@samsung.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rtc-linux@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 1/6] regmap: irq: dispose all virtual irq before removing domain
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:24:21 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56B9F695.4060501@osg.samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56B9F078.1030006@nvidia.com>
Hello Laxman,
On 02/09/2016 10:58 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 09 February 2016 06:57 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> Hello Laxman,
>>
>> On 02/09/2016 09:28 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>> It is require to dispose all virtual irq of hwirq on chip
>>> created on given irq domain before removing this irq domain.
>>> Hence dispose all mapped irqs before deleting the irq domains
>>> in regmap_del_irq_chip();
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
>>>
>>
>> I believe this patch could be picked separately and not made part of
>> this series since is fixing a bug that happens on most drivers using
>> the regmap-irq API. This will avoid cross-subsystem churn for people.
>>
>> Your patch 6/6 does not introduce a regression since the bug already
>> exists in the MFD driver, it just makes it more noticeable since it
>> is easier to unbind the max77686 RTC driver than the MFD one.
>
>
> If we dont have fix then rtc unbind/bind creates issue on S2R. Although it was issue on tot but the issue visible with my patch only.
>
> So if you test my 2 to 6 without 1, you will see issue.
>
Yes I know that but my point is that this will also happen in mainline if
the MFD device is unbind. Is just that it's harder to do so since at least
in the Chromebooks the regulators are used for the panel and backlight so
you will need a serial console.
> So to avoid bisect issue in functionality wise, this should go on sequence. This is my view.
>
The problem with patch series touching different subsystems is that the
maintainers have to agree on how to handle the possible conflicts so it
is easier for them if you split the patches and post them separately if
the are really no dependencies.
My view is that this fixes a regmap-irq core bug that is present in all
the drivers using regmap-irq that remove the IRQ chip after mapping IRQs
so it's really not related to your RTC series.
But of course I'm not a subsystem maintainer so is up to Alexandre and
Mark to decide that. I was just giving my opinion.
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-09 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-09 12:28 [PATCH V6 0/6] rtc: max77686: make max77686 rtc driver as IP driver Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 12:28 ` [PATCH V6 1/6] regmap: irq: dispose all virtual irq before removing domain Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 13:27 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-02-09 13:58 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 14:24 ` Javier Martinez Canillas [this message]
2016-02-09 15:14 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-09 15:05 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 15:21 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-02-09 14:50 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-02-09 16:16 ` Applied "regmap: irq: dispose all virtual irq before removing domain" to the regmap tree Mark Brown
2016-02-09 12:28 ` [PATCH V6 2/6] rtc: max77686: fix checkpatch error Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 12:28 ` [PATCH V6 3/6] rtc: max77686: use rtc regmap to access RTC registers Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 12:28 ` [PATCH V6 4/6] rtc: max77686: avoid reference of parent device info multiple places Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 12:28 ` [PATCH V6 5/6] mfd: max77686: do not set i2c client data for rtc i2c client Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 12:28 ` [PATCH V6 6/6] rtc: max77686: move initialisation of rtc regmap, irq chip locally Laxman Dewangan
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=56B9F695.4060501@osg.samsung.com \
--to=javier@osg.samsung.com \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=k.kozlowski@samsung.com \
--cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rtc-linux@googlegroups.com \
/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