8 messages, 4 authors, 2007-08-02 · open the first message on its own page
From: Yoni Levin <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-01 11:45:18
I want to receive interrupt from 1 GPIO port (for example 14) I changed the GPIMR to 0xffffffff (so I need to get interrupts from all GPIO ports) And then request the irq by : irq_create_mapping(NULL,74); request_irq(74,handler,IRQF_DISABLED,"GPIO",NULL); the return value is 0 (OK) but I cant receive any interrupt. do I need to do something else?
From: Florian A. Voegel <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-01 15:24:05
Is the interrupt configured properly for whatever it is you connect to it? (level vs edge triggered, rising vs falling) Best regards, Florian On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 14:45:05 +0300 "Yoni Levin" [off-list ref] wrote:
I want to receive interrupt from 1 GPIO port (for example 14) I changed the GPIMR to 0xffffffff (so I need to get interrupts from all GPIO ports) And then request the irq by : irq_create_mapping(NULL,74); request_irq(74,handler,IRQF_DISABLED,"GPIO",NULL); the return value is 0 (OK) but I cant receive any interrupt. do I need to do something else?
From: Scott Wood <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-01 18:36:26
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 02:45:05PM +0300, Yoni Levin wrote:
request_irq(74,handler,IRQF_DISABLED,"GPIO",NULL);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Did you try removing that flag (or calling enable_irq())? -Scott
From: Domen Puncer <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-02 06:11:51
On 01/08/07 13:36 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 02:45:05PM +0300, Yoni Levin wrote:quoted
request_irq(74,handler,IRQF_DISABLED,"GPIO",NULL);^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Did you try removing that flag (or calling enable_irq())?
From interrupt.h:
38 * IRQF_DISABLED - keep irqs disabled when calling the action handler
quoted
irq_create_mapping(NULL,74); request_irq(74,handler,IRQF_DISABLED,"GPIO",NULL);
Request irq should use virq that irq_create_mapping returns. Maybe there's another "enable global GPIO interrupts" register, that needs to be set too? Domen
From: Yoni Levin <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-02 08:37:31
Yes, I removed the flag (0) and nothing change in both cases the request_irq return 0 which is good. Then I added enable_irq and I recived : Unbalanced enable for IRQ 74 ------------[ cut here ]------------ Badness at c0043578 [verbose debug info unavailable] Call Trace: [C76C9D00] [C0008648] show_stack+0x48/0x194 (unreliable) [C76C9D30] [C0139364] report_bug+0x84/0xac [C76C9D40] [C000E398] program_check_exception+0xe0/0x538 [C76C9D80] [C000FE04] ret_from_except_full+0x0/0x4c
--- Exception: 700 at enable_irq+0x80/0xb0
LR = enable_irq+0x80/0xb0[C76C9E50] [C907423C] CreateGPIOHandler+0x28/0x7c [modexample] [C76C9E70] [C9074728] init_module+0x2c/0x8c [modexample] [C76C9E80] [C003B568] sys_init_module+0x1c4/0x165c [C76C9F40] [C000F7BC] ret_from_syscall+0x0/0x38
--- Exception: c01 at 0xff311f0
LR = 0x100316a8
By the way this is my code :
static irqreturn_t GPIOinterrupt_handler(int i,void *n,struct pt_regs *
myRegs)
{
printk("GPIO recived and handled !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...\n");
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
void CreateGPIOHandler()
{
unsigned int myirq=irq_create_mapping(NULL,74);
enable_irq(74);
printk("myirq is : %d \n",myirq);
int ret;
ret=- request_irq(74, GPIOinterrupt_handler,0, "GPIO", NULL);
printk("ret is : %d \n",ret);
}
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Wood [mailto:scottwood@freescale.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:36 PM
To: Yoni Levin
Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: GPIO interrupts on mpc8313e
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 02:45:05PM +0300, Yoni Levin wrote:request_irq(74,handler,IRQF_DISABLED,"GPIO",NULL);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Did you try removing that flag (or calling enable_irq())? -Scott
From: Scott Wood <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-02 15:19:17
Yoni Levin wrote:
Yes, I removed the flag (0) and nothing change in both cases the request_irq return 0 which is good. Then I added enable_irq and I recived : Unbalanced enable for IRQ 74
Yeah, sorry, I misremembered what IRQF_DISABLED does. As Domen pointed out, you need to pass myirq, not 74, to request_irq().
void CreateGPIOHandler()
{
unsigned int myirq=irq_create_mapping(NULL,74);
enable_irq(74);
printk("myirq is : %d \n",myirq);
int ret;
ret=- request_irq(74, GPIOinterrupt_handler,0, "GPIO", NULL);
printk("ret is : %d \n",ret);
}Even if IRQF_DISABLED did do what I thought it did (I was thinking of IRQ_NOAUTOEN, which is apparently an ARM-only thing), you should never call enable_irq() before request_irq(), or without previously disabling it (either explicitly or via IRQ_NOAUTOEN). -Scott
From: Yoni Levin <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-02 15:39:10
myirq=74 -----Original Message----- From: Scott Wood [mailto:scottwood@freescale.com] Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 6:19 PM To: Yoni Levin Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: GPIO interrupts on mpc8313e Yoni Levin wrote:
Yes, I removed the flag (0) and nothing change in both cases the
request_irq
return 0 which is good. Then I added enable_irq and I recived : Unbalanced enable for IRQ 74
Yeah, sorry, I misremembered what IRQF_DISABLED does. As Domen pointed out, you need to pass myirq, not 74, to request_irq().
void CreateGPIOHandler()
{
unsigned int myirq=irq_create_mapping(NULL,74);
enable_irq(74);
printk("myirq is : %d \n",myirq);
int ret;
ret=- request_irq(74, GPIOinterrupt_handler,0, "GPIO", NULL);
printk("ret is : %d \n",ret);
}Even if IRQF_DISABLED did do what I thought it did (I was thinking of IRQ_NOAUTOEN, which is apparently an ARM-only thing), you should never call enable_irq() before request_irq(), or without previously disabling it (either explicitly or via IRQ_NOAUTOEN). -Scott
From: Scott Wood <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-02 15:41:08
Yoni Levin wrote:
myirq=74
OK, that's obviously not the problem then, but you still shouldn't rely on them being equal. Try dumping the PIC registers to see which interrupts (if any) are actually pending. -Scott