Hi,Thanks for the clarification.
On 11-07-17 01:35, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
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 only gets set from crystalcove_irq_type
which at the top contains:
if (data->hwirq >= CRYSTALCOVE_GPIO_NUM)
So crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl will never get called for
TL;DR: your patch is not necessary.
On 06/15/2017 02:45 PM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
On 06/15/2017 02:19 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 AM,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.
From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Shouldn't it have been done using irq_valid_mask flag in the first place?
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)
regmap_update_bits(cg->regmap, reg, CTLI_INTCNT_BE, cg->intcnt_value);
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.