[PATCH v3 6/9] pinctrl: Add IRQ support to STM32 gpios
From: Alexandre Torgue <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-05 07:54:24
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, lkml
Hi Thomas, On 09/02/2016 09:10 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016, Alexandre TORGUE wrote:quoted
+static int stm32_gpio_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *d, + struct irq_fwspec *fwspec, + unsigned long *hwirq, + unsigned int *type) +{ + if ((fwspec->param_count != 2) || + (fwspec->param[0] >= STM32_GPIO_IRQ_LINE)) + return -EINVAL;Just a nitpick. This is unnecessarily hard to parse because you indented the line break like a conditional statement
I agree. I will modify it as the one below.
quoted
+ if ((fwspec->param_count != 2) || + (fwspec->param[0] >= STM32_GPIO_IRQ_LINE)) + return -EINVAL;Makes it immediately obvious that the second line belongs to the if.quoted
+static void stm32_gpio_domain_activate(struct irq_domain *d, + struct irq_data *irq_data) +{ + struct stm32_gpio_bank *bank = d->host_data; + struct stm32_pinctrl *pctl = dev_get_drvdata(bank->gpio_chip.parent); + + if (gpiochip_lock_as_irq(&bank->gpio_chip, irq_data->hwirq)) { + dev_err(pctl->dev, + "Unable to configure STM32 %s%ld as IRQ\n", + bank->gpio_chip.label, irq_data->hwirq); + return;Hmm, that's nasty. When an interrupt is mapped then we don't expect the activate function to fail. You really should lock that interrupt when it's mapped.
Ok. I will remove it from here.
quoted
+ } + regmap_field_write(pctl->irqmux[irq_data->hwirq], bank->range.id); +}quoted
+static int stm32_gpio_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, + unsigned int virq, + unsigned int nr_irqs, void *data) +{ + struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data; + struct irq_fwspec parent_fwspec; + struct stm32_pinctrl *pctl = domain->host_data; + irq_hw_number_t hwirq; + unsigned int i; + + hwirq = fwspec->param[0]; + for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) + irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i, + &stm32_gpio_irq_chip, pctl); + + parent_fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode; + parent_fwspec.param_count = 2; + parent_fwspec.param[0] = fwspec->param[0]; + parent_fwspec.param[1] = fwspec->param[1]; + + return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs, + &parent_fwspec);So doing it here would be probably the right thing to do: ret = gpiochip_lock_as_irq(); if (ret) return ret; ret = irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs, &parent_fwspec); if (ret) gpiochip_unlock_as_irq(); return ret; So of course you need your own free() function which undoes that lock thingy.
Ok thanks for proposal. Best regards. Alex
Thanks, tglx