On 06/06, kgunda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:Dropped out this patch as it is related to clearing the interrupts those are left enabled
On 2017-06-02 12:56, kgunda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>On 2017-05-31 23:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>On 05/30, Kiran Gunda wrote:
>>>From: Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>>Currently, cleanup_irq() is invoked when a peripheral's interrupt
>>>fires and there is no mapping present in the interrupt domain of
>>>spmi interrupt controller.
>>>
>>>The cleanup_irq clears the arbiter bit, clears the pmic interrupt
>>>and disables it at the pmic in that order. The last disable in
>>>cleanup_irq races with request_irq() in that it stomps over the
>>>enable issued by request_irq. Fix this by not writing to the pmic
>>>in cleanup_irq. The latched bit will be left set in the pmic,
>>>which will not send us more interrupts even if the enable bit
>>>stays enabled.
>>>
>>>When a client wants to request an interrupt, use the activate
>>>callback on the irq_domain to clear latched bit. This ensures
>>>that the latched, if set due to the above changes in cleanup_irq
>>>or when the bootloader leaves it set, gets cleaned up, paving way
>>>for upcoming interrupts to trigger.
>>>
>>>With this, there is a possibility of unwanted triggering of
>>>interrupt right after the latched bit is cleared - the interrupt
>>>may be left enabled too. To avoid that, clear the enable first
>>>followed by clearing the latched bit in the activate callback.
>>>
>>>Signed-off-by: Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Signed-off-by: Kiran Gunda <kgunda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>Please squash this with the patch that adds cleanup_irq() and
>>rewrite the commit text to combine details from both.
>Sure. Will squash it in the next patch submission.
Patch that adds cleanup_irq is already taken in to the tree.
Lets have this patch as is now.
Is this the one with the kbuild error? IRQ domains are not always
there, so I don't know how this is expected to work.