Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpio: gpio-crystalcove: Skip IRQ CTRL register update for virtual GPIOs

[Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan]

Hi Hans,


On 7/11/2017 2:47 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11-07-17 01:35, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
> > Hi Hans,
> >
> > Do you have any comments on this patch ? It kind of fixes your patch, 
> > so would prefer to get your comments.
>
> Sorry I did not notice this patch before, did you Cc me ?
>
> As for the patch, I deliberately did not add the check
> to crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl, crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl
> only gets called from crystalcove_bus_sync_unlock if
> UPDATE_IRQ_TYPE
>
> UPDATE_IRQ_TYPE only gets set from crystalcove_irq_type
> which at the top contains:
>
>         if (data->hwirq >= CRYSTALCOVE_GPIO_NUM)
>                 return 0;
>
> So crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl will never get called for
> virtual GPIOs.
>
> TL;DR: your patch is not necessary.
Thanks for the clarification.
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
> > On 06/15/2017 02:45 PM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
> > > Hi Andy,
> > >
> > >
> > > On 06/15/2017 02:19 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 AM,
> > > > <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
> > > > > <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > Commit 9a752b4c9ab9 ("gpio: crystalcove: Do not write regular gpio
> > > > > registers for virtual GPIOs") added support to skip GPIO register
> > > > > update for virtual GPIOs, but it missed to add skip logic in
> > > > > crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl() function. This patch fixes it.
> > > > > @@ -134,6 +134,9 @@ static void crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl(struct 
> > > > > crystalcove_gpio *cg, int gpio)
> > > > >   {
> > > > >          int reg = to_reg(gpio, CTRL_IN);
> > > > >
> > > > > +       if (reg < 0)
> > > > > +               return;
> > > > > +
> > > > >          regmap_update_bits(cg->regmap, reg, CTLI_INTCNT_BE, 
> > > > > cg->intcnt_value);
> > > > >   }
> > > > Shouldn't it have been done using irq_valid_mask flag in the first 
> > > > place?
> > > Agree. Setting irq_valid_mask would be the proper approach to skip 
> > > IRQ for some GPIO pins. But commit 9a752b4c9ab9 added the GPIO index 
> > > based checks in other IRQ set/unset functions in this driver and 
> > > missed to add it only in this update_irq_ctrl() function. May be I 
> > > can submit a separate patch to clean it up and use logic based on 
> > > setting irq_valid_mask.
> > >
> > > Even if we do the cleanup patch, I would still prefer to have this 
> > > check. Since to_reg() can return value < 0, its good to check it 
> > > before passing it to regmap_* functions. Let me know your comments.
> > >
> > > >