Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] gpio: pmic-eic-sprd: Two-dimensional arrays maintain pmic eic

From: Baolin Wang
Date: Wed Sep 27 2023 - 05:49:40 EST




On 9/27/2023 5:24 PM, Chunyan Zhang wrote:
On Wed, 27 Sept 2023 at 17:04, Baolin Wang
<baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 9/21/2023 8:25 PM, Wenhua Lin wrote:
A bank PMIC EIC contains 16 EICs, and the operating registers
are BIT0-BIT15, such as BIT0 of the register operated by EIC0.
Using the one-dimensional array reg[CACHE_NR_REGS] for maintenance
will cause the configuration of other EICs to be affected when
operating a certain EIC. In order to solve this problem, the register
operation bits of each PMIC EIC are maintained through the two-dimensional
array reg[SPRD_PMIC_EIC_NR][CACHE_NR_REGS] to avoid mutual interference.

LGTM. And this also deserves a Fixes tag.

Do we really need a two-dimensional array to save 16-bit value?

I also considering this, but after more thinking, I think this patch is a simple fix.

Now I realized the problem is that, if we use one array to cache a bank of EICs' status, the pmic_eic->reg[] array can contain incorrect configuration for other EICs in the same bank.

Yes, we can have another fix, for example, setting the pmic_eic->reg[] to some invalid values (maybe -1) in sprd_pmic_eic_bus_sync_unlock() after setting one EIC. Thus when setting another EIC, we can validate if the cached reg is a valid value, if not, we do not need to set the register. But like I said above, this seems more complicated.

Reviewed-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Signed-off-by: Wenhua Lin <Wenhua.Lin@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c | 21 +++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c
index c3e4d90f6b18..442968bb2490 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ struct sprd_pmic_eic {
struct gpio_chip chip;
struct regmap *map;
u32 offset;
- u8 reg[CACHE_NR_REGS];
+ u8 reg[SPRD_PMIC_EIC_NR][CACHE_NR_REGS];
struct mutex buslock;
int irq;
};
@@ -151,8 +151,8 @@ static void sprd_pmic_eic_irq_mask(struct irq_data *data)
struct sprd_pmic_eic *pmic_eic = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
u32 offset = irqd_to_hwirq(data);

- pmic_eic->reg[REG_IE] = 0;
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_TRIG] = 0;
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_IE] = 0;
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_TRIG] = 0;

gpiochip_disable_irq(chip, offset);
}
@@ -165,8 +165,8 @@ static void sprd_pmic_eic_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data)

gpiochip_enable_irq(chip, offset);

- pmic_eic->reg[REG_IE] = 1;
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_TRIG] = 1;
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_IE] = 1;
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_TRIG] = 1;
}

static int sprd_pmic_eic_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *data,
@@ -174,13 +174,14 @@ static int sprd_pmic_eic_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *data,
{
struct gpio_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
struct sprd_pmic_eic *pmic_eic = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
+ u32 offset = irqd_to_hwirq(data);

switch (flow_type) {
case IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH:
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_IEV] = 1;
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_IEV] = 1;
break;
case IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW:
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_IEV] = 0;
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_IEV] = 0;
break;
case IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING:
case IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING:
@@ -222,15 +223,15 @@ static void sprd_pmic_eic_bus_sync_unlock(struct irq_data *data)
sprd_pmic_eic_update(chip, offset, SPRD_PMIC_EIC_IEV, 1);
} else {
sprd_pmic_eic_update(chip, offset, SPRD_PMIC_EIC_IEV,
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_IEV]);
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_IEV]);
}

/* Set irq unmask */
sprd_pmic_eic_update(chip, offset, SPRD_PMIC_EIC_IE,
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_IE]);
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_IE]);
/* Generate trigger start pulse for debounce EIC */
sprd_pmic_eic_update(chip, offset, SPRD_PMIC_EIC_TRIG,
- pmic_eic->reg[REG_TRIG]);
+ pmic_eic->reg[offset][REG_TRIG]);

mutex_unlock(&pmic_eic->buslock);
}