All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: list-09_linux_arm@tqsc.de (Markus Niebel)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [[RFC PATCH]] gpio: gpio-mxc: make sure gpio is input when request IRQ
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:19:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53CE107A.1000000@tqsc.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140722062803.GA21229@dragon>

Am 22.07.2014 08:28, wrote Shawn Guo:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 03:51:04PM +0200, Markus Niebel wrote:
>> From: Markus Niebel <Markus.Niebel@tq-group.com>
>>
>> When requesting an GPIO irq for imx Soc two things are missing:
>> - there is no check, if the GPIO is already requested
>> - there is no check, if the GPIO is configured as input
>>
>> The first case can lead to reconfiguring the GPIO pin from third
>> party while it is used as IRQ pin, second case will (eventually)
>> prevent IRQ from being seen by SOC becaus the pin is driven by
>> Soc
>>
>> This patch tries to implement (logic taken roughly from gpio-omap)
>> - basic check if gpio already requested
>> - if needed requests the gpio and configures as IN.
>> - if gpio is already requested it is only verified if pin is IN
>> - gpio is locked as irq
>>
>> Tested on a not mainlined i.MX6 based hardware with pin configured
>> by bootloader as OUT HIGH and expecting a low active IRQ.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Niebel <Markus.Niebel@tq-group.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c |   35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c
>> index db83b3c..4316a38 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c
>> @@ -175,6 +175,31 @@ static int gpio_set_irq_type(struct irq_data *d, u32 type)
>>  	u32 gpio = port->bgc.gc.base + gpio_idx;
>>  	int edge;
>>  	void __iomem *reg = port->base;
>> +	int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +	if (!gpiochip_is_requested(&port->bgc.gc, gpio_idx)) {
>> +		char label[32];
>> +
>> +		snprintf(label, 32, "gpio%u-irq", gpio);
>> +		ret = gpio_request_one(gpio, GPIOF_DIR_IN, label);
> 
> I'm not sure it's correct to call gpio_request_one() from .set_irq_type
> hook.  It looks like a API usage violation to me.  It should really be
> called from client driver.

Thats why it is an RFC. I add Linus Walleij to the cc-list.

Let me describe the problem:

Currently client drivers have simply interrupts and interrupt-parent
in their bindings, but no interrupt-gpios. Therefore in this case a
client does not know about a dedicated gpio which is to be requested
and configured.

> 
>> +	} else {
>> +		val = readl(port->base + GPIO_GDIR);
>> +		if (val & BIT(gpio_idx))
>> +			ret = -EINVAL;
> 
> It says that the GPIO is requested by someone, but we're not really sure
> if it's the correct one, i.e. the one is requesting set_irq_type.
> 

Yes, but the current situation is even worse (in my eyes): an IRQ can be requested and an
independend party can request and configure the gpio as output ...

>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (ret) {
>> +		dev_err(port->bgc.gc.dev, "unable to set gpio_idx %u as IN\n",
>> +			gpio_idx);
>> +		return ret;
>> +	}
> 
> Having said that, I'm not sure any above changes is really necessary.
> If any, I would say only gpiochip_is_requested() check makes some sense,
> but we should just fail out if the GPIO hasn't been requested.  Nothing
> more can be done in there.

Going that way as a consequence a reworked device tree binding for gpio irq is needed
(just like in the platform data days) when providing a gpio number and the client has
to request gpio and irq - correct me if I'm wrong.

Maybe here is something needed with deeper knowledge in the gpio subsystem.

> 
>> +
>> +	ret = gpio_lock_as_irq(&port->bgc.gc, gpio_idx);
>> +	if (ret) {
>> +		dev_err(port->bgc.gc.dev, "unable to lock gpio_idx %u for IRQ\n",
>> +			gpio_idx);
>> +		return ret;
>> +	}
> 
> This and the following changes do make sense to me.
> 
> Shawn
> 
>>  
>>  	port->both_edges &= ~(1 << gpio_idx);
>>  	switch (type) {
>> @@ -231,6 +256,15 @@ static int gpio_set_irq_type(struct irq_data *d, u32 type)
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void gpio_irq_shutdown(struct irq_data *d)
>> +{
>> +	struct irq_chip_generic *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>> +	struct mxc_gpio_port *port = gc->private;
>> +	u32 gpio_idx = d->hwirq;
>> +
>> +	gpio_unlock_as_irq(&port->bgc.gc, gpio_idx);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static void mxc_flip_edge(struct mxc_gpio_port *port, u32 gpio)
>>  {
>>  	void __iomem *reg = port->base;
>> @@ -353,6 +387,7 @@ static void __init mxc_gpio_init_gc(struct mxc_gpio_port *port, int irq_base)
>>  	ct->chip.irq_mask = irq_gc_mask_clr_bit;
>>  	ct->chip.irq_unmask = irq_gc_mask_set_bit;
>>  	ct->chip.irq_set_type = gpio_set_irq_type;
>> +	ct->chip.irq_shutdown = gpio_irq_shutdown;
>>  	ct->chip.irq_set_wake = gpio_set_wake_irq;
>>  	ct->regs.ack = GPIO_ISR;
>>  	ct->regs.mask = GPIO_IMR;
>> -- 
>> 1.7.9.5
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-22  7:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-16 13:51 [[RFC PATCH]] gpio: gpio-mxc: make sure gpio is input when request IRQ Markus Niebel
2014-07-22  6:28 ` Shawn Guo
2014-07-22  7:19   ` Markus Niebel [this message]
     [not found]     ` <53CE107A.1000000-7U5DVgMjAv4@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-22  7:42       ` Shawn Guo
2014-07-22  7:42         ` Shawn Guo
2014-07-23 16:14         ` Linus Walleij
2014-07-23 16:14           ` Linus Walleij
2014-07-24  8:12           ` Markus Niebel
2014-07-24  8:12             ` Markus Niebel
     [not found]             ` <53D0C008.70305-7U5DVgMjAv4@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-25 11:38               ` Linus Walleij
2014-07-25 11:38                 ` Linus Walleij
     [not found]                 ` <CACRpkdarH_-2uW55C5bAUxM1ESgSb6tJAWc4UqEoWr8uc_kQRQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-25 12:52                   ` Markus Niebel
2014-07-25 12:52                     ` Markus Niebel
     [not found]                     ` <53D252F5.2060601-7U5DVgMjAv4@public.gmane.org>
2014-07-25 13:52                       ` Linus Walleij
2014-07-25 13:52                         ` Linus Walleij
2014-07-23 16:10 ` Linus Walleij

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=53CE107A.1000000@tqsc.de \
    --to=list-09_linux_arm@tqsc.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.