Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: ls1021a-tsn: Use interrupts for the SGMII PHYs

[Vladimir Oltean]

On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 23:05, Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 08:52:54PM +0100, Alexander Stein wrote:
> >  On Saturday, November 9, 2019, 4:21:51 PM CET Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > On 09/11/2019, Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 12:56:42PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > >> On the LS1021A-TSN board, the 2 Atheros AR8031 PHYs for eth0 and eth1
> > > >> have interrupt lines connected to the shared IRQ2_B LS1021A pin.
> > > >>
> > > >> The interrupts are active low, but the GICv2 controller does not support
> > > >> active-low and falling-edge interrupts, so the only mode it can be
> > > >> configured in is rising-edge.
> > > >
> > > > Hi Vladimir
> > > >
> > > > So how does this work? The rising edge would occur after the interrupt
> > > > handler has completed? What triggers the interrupt handler?
> > > >
> > > >   Andrew
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > I hope I am not terribly confused about this. I thought I am telling
> > > the interrupt controller to raise an IRQ as a result of the
> > > low-to-high transition of the electrical signal. Experimentation sure
> > > seems to agree with me. So the IRQ is generated immediately _after_
> > > the PHY has left the line in open drain and it got pulled up to Vdd.
> >
>
> > It is correct GIC only supports raising edge and active-high. The
> > IRQ[0:5] on ls1021a are a bit special though.  They not directly
> > connected to GIC, but there is an optional inverter, enabled by
> > default.
>
> Ah, O.K. So configuring for a rising edge is actually giving a falling
> edge. Which is why it works.
>
> Actually supporting this correctly is going a cause some pain. I
> wonder how many DT files currently say rising/active high, when in
> fact falling/active low is actually being used? And when the IRQ
> controller really does support active low and falling, things brake?
>
> Vladimir, since this is a shared interrupt, you really should use
> active low here. Maybe the first step is to get control of the
> inverter, and define a DT binding which is not going to break
> backwards compatibility. And then wire up this interrupt.
>
>           Andrew

Oh, ok, this is what you mean, thanks Alexander for the clarification.
This sure escalated quickly and is going to keep me busy for a while.

-Vladimir