On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:29:45PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:

Add driver support for Qualcomm PCIe Endpoint controller driver based on
the Designware core with added Qualcomm specific wrapper around the
core.
...

+static irqreturn_t qcom_pcie_ep_perst_irq_thread(int irq, void *data)
+{
+     struct qcom_pcie_ep *pcie_ep = data;
+     struct dw_pcie *pci = &pcie_ep->pci;
+     struct device *dev = pci->dev;
+     u32 perst;
+
+     perst = gpiod_get_value(pcie_ep->reset);
+     if (perst) {
+             dev_dbg(dev, "PERST asserted by host. Shutting down the PCIe link!\n");
+             qcom_pcie_perst_assert(pci);
+     } else {
+             dev_dbg(dev, "PERST de-asserted by host. Starting link training!\n");
+             qcom_pcie_perst_deassert(pci);
+     }
+
+     irq_set_irq_type(gpiod_to_irq(pcie_ep->reset),
+                      (perst ? IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH : IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW));

1) There are only a handful of instances of irq_set_irq_type() being
used with IRQF_TRIGGER_* (all others use IRQ_TYPE_*).

2) Using irq_set_irq_type() in an IRQ handler is unusual and seems
potentially racy.  Almost all irq_set_irq_type() uses are in
initialization or probe paths.  I did see one similar use in an IRQ
handler (rb532_pata_irq_handler()), but the rarity of this pattern
makes me suspicious.

+static int qcom_pcie_ep_enable_irq_resources(struct platform_device *pdev,
+                                          struct qcom_pcie_ep *pcie_ep)
+{
+ ...
+     pcie_ep->perst_irq = gpiod_to_irq(pcie_ep->reset);
+     irq_set_status_flags(pcie_ep->perst_irq, IRQ_NOAUTOEN);
+     ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, pcie_ep->perst_irq, NULL,
+                                     qcom_pcie_ep_perst_irq_thread,
+                                     IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT,
+                                     "perst_irq", pcie_ep);

The similar code in the tegra194 driver looks like this:

  tegra_pcie_config_ep
    devm_request_threaded_irq(tegra_pcie_ep_pex_rst_irq,
                  IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_ONESHOT)

  tegra_pcie_ep_pex_rst_irq
    if (gpiod_get_value(pcie->pex_rst_gpiod))
      pex_ep_event_pex_rst_assert(pcie);
    else
      pex_ep_event_pex_rst_deassert(pcie);

Could qcom work the same way by requesting the IRQ with
"IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING" instead of
"IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH", and omitting the irq_set_irq_type()?

I know rising/falling is edge-triggered and high/low is
level-triggered, but surely qcom isn't completely unique in the way
its IRQ is wired up?