All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
	Carlo Caione <carlo-KA+7E9HrN00dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Jason Cooper <jason-NLaQJdtUoK4Be96aLqz0jA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-amlogic-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	linux-gpio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Linus Walleij
	<linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Russell King <linux-I+IVW8TIWO2tmTQ+vhA3Yw@public.gmane.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] irqchip: meson: add support for gpio interrupt controller
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:33:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ec297647-1ab7-7e6b-5945-be8360f92421@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1476890480-8884-2-git-send-email-jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>

Jerome,

On 19/10/16 16:21, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> Add support for the interrupt gpio controller found on Amlogic's meson
> SoC family.
> 
> Unlike what the IP name suggest, it is not directly linked to the gpio
> subsystem. It is actually an independent IP that is able to spy on the
> SoC pad. For that purpose, it can mux and filter (edge or level and
> polarity) any single SoC pad to one of the 8 GIC's interrupts it owns.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/Kconfig          |   9 +
>  drivers/irqchip/Makefile         |   1 +
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c | 423 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 433 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> index 82b0b5daf3f5..168837263e80 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> @@ -279,3 +279,12 @@ config EZNPS_GIC
>  config STM32_EXTI
>  	bool
>  	select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +
> +config MESON_GPIO_IRQ
> +       bool "Meson GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer"
> +       depends on ARCH_MESON || COMPILE_TEST
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN_HIERARCHY
> +       help
> +         Support Meson SoC Family GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer
> +
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> index e4dbfc85abdb..33f913d037d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> @@ -74,3 +74,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_LS_SCFG_MSI)		+= irq-ls-scfg-msi.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_EZNPS_GIC)			+= irq-eznps.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ASPEED)		+= irq-aspeed-vic.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_STM32_EXTI) 		+= irq-stm32-exti.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_MESON_GPIO_IRQ)		+= irq-meson-gpio.o
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..869b4df8c483
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,423 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2015 Endless Mobile, Inc.
> + * Author: Carlo Caione <carlo-6IF/jdPJHihWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> + * Copyright (c) 2016 BayLibre, SAS.
> + * Author: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public License as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> + * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
> + * General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program; if not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + * The full GNU General Public License is included in this distribution
> + * in the file called COPYING.
> + */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/irqchip.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +
> +#define IRQ_FREE (-1)
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL	0x00
> +#define REG_PIN_03_SEL	0x04
> +#define REG_PIN_47_SEL	0x08
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL	0x0c
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(x)	(BIT(x) | BIT(16 + (x)))
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(x)	BIT(x)
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(x)	BIT(16 + (x))
> +#define REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(x)	(((x) % 4) * 8)
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL_SHIFT(x)	((x) * 4)
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_params {
> +	unsigned int nhwirq;
> +	irq_hw_number_t *source;
> +	int nsource;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_domain {

The name of that structure is utterly confusing, as it doesn't contain
anything related to an IRQ domain. Can you please clarify its usage?

> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int *map;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data {
> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int index;
> +};
> +
> +static irq_hw_number_t meson_parent_hwirqs[] = {
> +	64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71,
> +};

If that a guarantee that these numbers will always represent the parent
interrupt? It feels a bit odd not to get that information directly from
the device tree, in the form of a device specific property. Something like:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 65 66 ... >;

or even as a base/range:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 8>;

Also, how does it work if you have more than a single device like this?
This driver seems a do a great deal of dynamic allocation, and yet its
core resource is completely static... Please pick a side! ;-)

> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 134,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),

I find it utterly confusing that you are calling source something that
is an output for this controller. It makes my brain melt, and I don't
like the feeling.

> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8b_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 119,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson_gxbb_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 133,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};

Same thing. How big is the variability of these structures? Are we going
to see more of those? or is that now set into stone?

+Mark: what's the policy to describe this kind of things?

> +
> +static const struct of_device_id meson_irq_gpio_matches[] = {
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",

If it's an independent IP (as described in the commit message),
shouldn't in be rescribed in a more SoC-independent way?

> +		.data = &meson8_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson8b_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson_gxbb_params
> +	},
> +	{}
> +};
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(void __iomem *base, unsigned int reg,
> +				       u32 mask, u32 val)
> +{
> +	u32 tmp;
> +
> +	tmp = readl(base + reg);
> +	tmp &= ~mask;
> +	tmp |= val;
> +
> +	writel(tmp, base + reg);

Can't you use the relaxed accessors?

> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_get_index(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				    int hwirq)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < domain_data->params->nsource; i++) {
> +		if (domain_data->map[i] == hwirq)
> +			return i;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -1;

I'm a bit worried by this function. If you need an allocator, then
having a simple bitmap is much better than iterating over an array.

If you're using this to go from a hwirq to the structure describing your
interrupt, this is wrong. You should never have to look-up something
based on a hwirq, because that's what irq domains are for.

> +}
> +
> +static int mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t hwirq,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t *source)
> +{
> +	int index;
> +	unsigned int reg;
> +
> +	index = meson_gpio_irq_get_index(domain_data, IRQ_FREE);

So assuming you turn this into a proper bitmap driven allocator...

> +	if (index < 0) {
> +		pr_err("No irq available\n");
> +		return -ENOSPC;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data->map[index] = hwirq;

this can go away, as there is hardly any point in tracking the hwirq on
its own. Actually, the whole map[] array looks totally useless.

> +
> +	reg = (index < 4) ? REG_PIN_03_SEL : REG_PIN_47_SEL;
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(domain_data->base, reg,
> +				   0xff << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index),
> +				   hwirq << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index));
> +
> +	*source = domain_data->params->source[index];
> +
> +	pr_debug("hwirq %lu assigned to channel %d - source %lu\n",
> +		 hwirq, index, *source);
> +
> +	return index;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(unsigned int type, void __iomem *base,
> +				     int index)
> +{
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +
> +	type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	if (type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(index);
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(index);
> +
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(base, REG_EDGE_POL,
> +				   REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(index), val);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int meson_gpio_irq_type_output(unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	unsigned int sense = type & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	type &= ~IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the polarity of interrupt is low, the controller will
> +	 * invert the signal for gic
> +	 */
> +	if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH;
> +	else if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
> +
> +	return type;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("set type of hwirq %lu to %u\n", data->hwirq, type);
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, cd->base, cd->index);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return irq_chip_set_type_parent(data,
> +					meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type));
> +}
> +
> +static struct irq_chip meson_gpio_irq_chip = {
> +	.name			= "meson-gpio-irqchip",
> +	.irq_mask		= irq_chip_mask_parent,
> +	.irq_unmask		= irq_chip_unmask_parent,
> +	.irq_eoi		= irq_chip_eoi_parent,
> +	.irq_set_type		= meson_gpio_irq_set_type,
> +	.irq_retrigger		= irq_chip_retrigger_hierarchy,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +	.irq_set_affinity	= irq_chip_set_affinity_parent,
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   struct irq_fwspec *fwspec,
> +					   unsigned long *hwirq,
> +					   unsigned int *type)
> +{
> +	if (is_of_node(fwspec->fwnode)) {
> +		if (fwspec->param_count != 2)
> +			return -EINVAL;

You can write this as:

	if (is_of_node() && fwspec->... == 2) {

> +
> +		*hwirq	= fwspec->param[0];
> +		*type	= fwspec->param[1];
> +
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   unsigned int virq,
> +					   irq_hw_number_t source,
> +					   unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec fwspec;
> +
> +	if (!irq_domain_get_of_node(domain->parent))
> +		return -EINVAL;

How can you end-up here if the translate operation has failed?

> +
> +	fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
> +	fwspec.param_count = 3;
> +	fwspec.param[0] = 0;	/* SPI */
> +	fwspec.param[1] = source;
> +	fwspec.param[2] = meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type);
> +
> +	return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, 1, &fwspec);
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs,
> +				       void *data)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	unsigned long hwirq, source;
> +	unsigned int type;
> +	int i, index, ret;
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(domain, fwspec, &hwirq, &type);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("irq %d, nr_irqs %d, hwirqs %lu\n", virq, nr_irqs, hwirq);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

This is a pattern that gets repeated over and over, for no good reason.
The only reason we have this nr_irqs thing is to handle things like
multi-MSI, where we have to *guarantee* that the hwirqs are allocated in
a contiguous manner.

Here, you don't enforce that guarantee, so you'd rather have a big fat:

	if (WARN_ON(nr_irqs != 1))
		return -EINVAL;

and get rid of that loop, because I cannot imagine a case where you'd
allocate more than a single interrupt at a time.

> +		index = mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(domain_data, hwirq + i,
> +						   &source);
> +		if (index < 0)
> +			return index;
> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, domain_data->base,
> +						index);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;

Why do you have to to this here? This should be handled by the core code
already.

> +
> +		cd = kzalloc(sizeof(*cd), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!cd)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +		cd->base = domain_data->base;
> +		cd->index = index;

So what is the exact purpose of this structure? The base address is
essentially a global, or could be directly derived from the domain. The
index is only used in set_type, and is the index of the pin connected to
the GIC. It looks to me like you could have:

		irq_hw_number_t *out_line = &meson_parent_hwirqs[index];

> +
> +		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> +					      &meson_gpio_irq_chip, cd);

and this written as

		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq, hwirq,
					      out_line);

In your set_type function, you just compute the index back:

	irq_hw_number_t *out_line = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
	irq_hw_number_t index = out_line - meson_parent_hwirqs;

and you're done.

> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(domain, virq + i,
> +						      source, type);

Resource leak on error.

> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	struct irq_data *irq_data;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

Same comment as above.

> +		irq_data = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq + i);
> +		cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(irq_data);
> +
> +		domain_data->map[cd->index] = IRQ_FREE;
> +		kfree(cd);
> +	}
> +
> +	irq_domain_free_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs);
> +
> +}
> +
> +static const struct irq_domain_ops meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops = {
> +	.alloc		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc,
> +	.free		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_free,
> +	.translate	= meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init
> +meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(struct device_node *node,
> +			   struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +			   const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int nsource = params->nsource;
> +	int *map;
> +
> +	map = kcalloc(nsource, sizeof(*map), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!map)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nsource; i++)
> +		map[i] = IRQ_FREE;
> +
> +	domain_data->map = map;

You should now be able to kill most or all of this.

> +	domain_data->params = params;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init meson_gpio_irq_of_init(struct device_node *node,
> +					 struct device_node *parent)
> +{
> +	struct irq_domain *domain, *parent_domain;
> +	const struct of_device_id *match;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	match = of_match_node(meson_irq_gpio_matches, node);
> +	if (!match)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	params = match->data;
> +
> +	if (!parent) {
> +		pr_err("missing parent interrupt node\n");
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	parent_domain = irq_find_host(parent);
> +	if (!parent_domain) {
> +		pr_err("unable to obtain parent domain\n");
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain_data), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!domain_data)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	domain_data->base = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +	if (!domain_data->base) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(node, domain_data, params);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +
> +	domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0, params->nhwirq,
> +					  node, &meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops,
> +					  domain_data);

Please be consistent in using the fwnode API instead of the of_node one.

> +
> +	if (!domain) {
> +		pr_err("failed to allocated domain\n");
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +	}
> +
> +	pr_info("%d to %d gpio interrupt mux initialized\n",
> +		params->nhwirq, params->nsource);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +out_free_dev_content:
> +	kfree(domain_data->map);
> +	iounmap(domain_data->base);
> +
> +out_free_dev:
> +	kfree(domain_data);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8b_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(gxbb_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> 

Overall, this driver is a bit of a mess. Tons of structures that don't
make much sense, and a false sense of being able to support multiple
instances of the device.

I'll let Mark comment on the DT side of things.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>,
	Carlo Caione <carlo@caione.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Cc: linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] irqchip: meson: add support for gpio interrupt controller
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:33:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ec297647-1ab7-7e6b-5945-be8360f92421@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1476890480-8884-2-git-send-email-jbrunet@baylibre.com>

Jerome,

On 19/10/16 16:21, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> Add support for the interrupt gpio controller found on Amlogic's meson
> SoC family.
> 
> Unlike what the IP name suggest, it is not directly linked to the gpio
> subsystem. It is actually an independent IP that is able to spy on the
> SoC pad. For that purpose, it can mux and filter (edge or level and
> polarity) any single SoC pad to one of the 8 GIC's interrupts it owns.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/Kconfig          |   9 +
>  drivers/irqchip/Makefile         |   1 +
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c | 423 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 433 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> index 82b0b5daf3f5..168837263e80 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> @@ -279,3 +279,12 @@ config EZNPS_GIC
>  config STM32_EXTI
>  	bool
>  	select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +
> +config MESON_GPIO_IRQ
> +       bool "Meson GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer"
> +       depends on ARCH_MESON || COMPILE_TEST
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN_HIERARCHY
> +       help
> +         Support Meson SoC Family GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer
> +
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> index e4dbfc85abdb..33f913d037d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> @@ -74,3 +74,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_LS_SCFG_MSI)		+= irq-ls-scfg-msi.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_EZNPS_GIC)			+= irq-eznps.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ASPEED)		+= irq-aspeed-vic.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_STM32_EXTI) 		+= irq-stm32-exti.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_MESON_GPIO_IRQ)		+= irq-meson-gpio.o
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..869b4df8c483
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,423 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2015 Endless Mobile, Inc.
> + * Author: Carlo Caione <carlo@endlessm.com>
> + * Copyright (c) 2016 BayLibre, SAS.
> + * Author: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public License as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> + * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
> + * General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program; if not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + * The full GNU General Public License is included in this distribution
> + * in the file called COPYING.
> + */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/irqchip.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +
> +#define IRQ_FREE (-1)
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL	0x00
> +#define REG_PIN_03_SEL	0x04
> +#define REG_PIN_47_SEL	0x08
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL	0x0c
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(x)	(BIT(x) | BIT(16 + (x)))
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(x)	BIT(x)
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(x)	BIT(16 + (x))
> +#define REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(x)	(((x) % 4) * 8)
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL_SHIFT(x)	((x) * 4)
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_params {
> +	unsigned int nhwirq;
> +	irq_hw_number_t *source;
> +	int nsource;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_domain {

The name of that structure is utterly confusing, as it doesn't contain
anything related to an IRQ domain. Can you please clarify its usage?

> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int *map;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data {
> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int index;
> +};
> +
> +static irq_hw_number_t meson_parent_hwirqs[] = {
> +	64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71,
> +};

If that a guarantee that these numbers will always represent the parent
interrupt? It feels a bit odd not to get that information directly from
the device tree, in the form of a device specific property. Something like:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 65 66 ... >;

or even as a base/range:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 8>;

Also, how does it work if you have more than a single device like this?
This driver seems a do a great deal of dynamic allocation, and yet its
core resource is completely static... Please pick a side! ;-)

> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 134,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),

I find it utterly confusing that you are calling source something that
is an output for this controller. It makes my brain melt, and I don't
like the feeling.

> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8b_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 119,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson_gxbb_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 133,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};

Same thing. How big is the variability of these structures? Are we going
to see more of those? or is that now set into stone?

+Mark: what's the policy to describe this kind of things?

> +
> +static const struct of_device_id meson_irq_gpio_matches[] = {
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",

If it's an independent IP (as described in the commit message),
shouldn't in be rescribed in a more SoC-independent way?

> +		.data = &meson8_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson8b_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson_gxbb_params
> +	},
> +	{}
> +};
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(void __iomem *base, unsigned int reg,
> +				       u32 mask, u32 val)
> +{
> +	u32 tmp;
> +
> +	tmp = readl(base + reg);
> +	tmp &= ~mask;
> +	tmp |= val;
> +
> +	writel(tmp, base + reg);

Can't you use the relaxed accessors?

> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_get_index(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				    int hwirq)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < domain_data->params->nsource; i++) {
> +		if (domain_data->map[i] == hwirq)
> +			return i;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -1;

I'm a bit worried by this function. If you need an allocator, then
having a simple bitmap is much better than iterating over an array.

If you're using this to go from a hwirq to the structure describing your
interrupt, this is wrong. You should never have to look-up something
based on a hwirq, because that's what irq domains are for.

> +}
> +
> +static int mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t hwirq,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t *source)
> +{
> +	int index;
> +	unsigned int reg;
> +
> +	index = meson_gpio_irq_get_index(domain_data, IRQ_FREE);

So assuming you turn this into a proper bitmap driven allocator...

> +	if (index < 0) {
> +		pr_err("No irq available\n");
> +		return -ENOSPC;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data->map[index] = hwirq;

this can go away, as there is hardly any point in tracking the hwirq on
its own. Actually, the whole map[] array looks totally useless.

> +
> +	reg = (index < 4) ? REG_PIN_03_SEL : REG_PIN_47_SEL;
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(domain_data->base, reg,
> +				   0xff << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index),
> +				   hwirq << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index));
> +
> +	*source = domain_data->params->source[index];
> +
> +	pr_debug("hwirq %lu assigned to channel %d - source %lu\n",
> +		 hwirq, index, *source);
> +
> +	return index;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(unsigned int type, void __iomem *base,
> +				     int index)
> +{
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +
> +	type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	if (type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(index);
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(index);
> +
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(base, REG_EDGE_POL,
> +				   REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(index), val);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int meson_gpio_irq_type_output(unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	unsigned int sense = type & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	type &= ~IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the polarity of interrupt is low, the controller will
> +	 * invert the signal for gic
> +	 */
> +	if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH;
> +	else if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
> +
> +	return type;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("set type of hwirq %lu to %u\n", data->hwirq, type);
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, cd->base, cd->index);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return irq_chip_set_type_parent(data,
> +					meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type));
> +}
> +
> +static struct irq_chip meson_gpio_irq_chip = {
> +	.name			= "meson-gpio-irqchip",
> +	.irq_mask		= irq_chip_mask_parent,
> +	.irq_unmask		= irq_chip_unmask_parent,
> +	.irq_eoi		= irq_chip_eoi_parent,
> +	.irq_set_type		= meson_gpio_irq_set_type,
> +	.irq_retrigger		= irq_chip_retrigger_hierarchy,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +	.irq_set_affinity	= irq_chip_set_affinity_parent,
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   struct irq_fwspec *fwspec,
> +					   unsigned long *hwirq,
> +					   unsigned int *type)
> +{
> +	if (is_of_node(fwspec->fwnode)) {
> +		if (fwspec->param_count != 2)
> +			return -EINVAL;

You can write this as:

	if (is_of_node() && fwspec->... == 2) {

> +
> +		*hwirq	= fwspec->param[0];
> +		*type	= fwspec->param[1];
> +
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   unsigned int virq,
> +					   irq_hw_number_t source,
> +					   unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec fwspec;
> +
> +	if (!irq_domain_get_of_node(domain->parent))
> +		return -EINVAL;

How can you end-up here if the translate operation has failed?

> +
> +	fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
> +	fwspec.param_count = 3;
> +	fwspec.param[0] = 0;	/* SPI */
> +	fwspec.param[1] = source;
> +	fwspec.param[2] = meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type);
> +
> +	return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, 1, &fwspec);
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs,
> +				       void *data)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	unsigned long hwirq, source;
> +	unsigned int type;
> +	int i, index, ret;
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(domain, fwspec, &hwirq, &type);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("irq %d, nr_irqs %d, hwirqs %lu\n", virq, nr_irqs, hwirq);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

This is a pattern that gets repeated over and over, for no good reason.
The only reason we have this nr_irqs thing is to handle things like
multi-MSI, where we have to *guarantee* that the hwirqs are allocated in
a contiguous manner.

Here, you don't enforce that guarantee, so you'd rather have a big fat:

	if (WARN_ON(nr_irqs != 1))
		return -EINVAL;

and get rid of that loop, because I cannot imagine a case where you'd
allocate more than a single interrupt at a time.

> +		index = mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(domain_data, hwirq + i,
> +						   &source);
> +		if (index < 0)
> +			return index;
> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, domain_data->base,
> +						index);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;

Why do you have to to this here? This should be handled by the core code
already.

> +
> +		cd = kzalloc(sizeof(*cd), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!cd)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +		cd->base = domain_data->base;
> +		cd->index = index;

So what is the exact purpose of this structure? The base address is
essentially a global, or could be directly derived from the domain. The
index is only used in set_type, and is the index of the pin connected to
the GIC. It looks to me like you could have:

		irq_hw_number_t *out_line = &meson_parent_hwirqs[index];

> +
> +		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> +					      &meson_gpio_irq_chip, cd);

and this written as

		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq, hwirq,
					      out_line);

In your set_type function, you just compute the index back:

	irq_hw_number_t *out_line = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
	irq_hw_number_t index = out_line - meson_parent_hwirqs;

and you're done.

> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(domain, virq + i,
> +						      source, type);

Resource leak on error.

> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	struct irq_data *irq_data;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

Same comment as above.

> +		irq_data = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq + i);
> +		cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(irq_data);
> +
> +		domain_data->map[cd->index] = IRQ_FREE;
> +		kfree(cd);
> +	}
> +
> +	irq_domain_free_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs);
> +
> +}
> +
> +static const struct irq_domain_ops meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops = {
> +	.alloc		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc,
> +	.free		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_free,
> +	.translate	= meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init
> +meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(struct device_node *node,
> +			   struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +			   const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int nsource = params->nsource;
> +	int *map;
> +
> +	map = kcalloc(nsource, sizeof(*map), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!map)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nsource; i++)
> +		map[i] = IRQ_FREE;
> +
> +	domain_data->map = map;

You should now be able to kill most or all of this.

> +	domain_data->params = params;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init meson_gpio_irq_of_init(struct device_node *node,
> +					 struct device_node *parent)
> +{
> +	struct irq_domain *domain, *parent_domain;
> +	const struct of_device_id *match;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	match = of_match_node(meson_irq_gpio_matches, node);
> +	if (!match)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	params = match->data;
> +
> +	if (!parent) {
> +		pr_err("missing parent interrupt node\n");
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	parent_domain = irq_find_host(parent);
> +	if (!parent_domain) {
> +		pr_err("unable to obtain parent domain\n");
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain_data), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!domain_data)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	domain_data->base = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +	if (!domain_data->base) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(node, domain_data, params);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +
> +	domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0, params->nhwirq,
> +					  node, &meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops,
> +					  domain_data);

Please be consistent in using the fwnode API instead of the of_node one.

> +
> +	if (!domain) {
> +		pr_err("failed to allocated domain\n");
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +	}
> +
> +	pr_info("%d to %d gpio interrupt mux initialized\n",
> +		params->nhwirq, params->nsource);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +out_free_dev_content:
> +	kfree(domain_data->map);
> +	iounmap(domain_data->base);
> +
> +out_free_dev:
> +	kfree(domain_data);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8b_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(gxbb_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> 

Overall, this driver is a bit of a mess. Tons of structures that don't
make much sense, and a false sense of being able to support multiple
instances of the device.

I'll let Mark comment on the DT side of things.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/9] irqchip: meson: add support for gpio interrupt controller
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:33:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ec297647-1ab7-7e6b-5945-be8360f92421@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1476890480-8884-2-git-send-email-jbrunet@baylibre.com>

Jerome,

On 19/10/16 16:21, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> Add support for the interrupt gpio controller found on Amlogic's meson
> SoC family.
> 
> Unlike what the IP name suggest, it is not directly linked to the gpio
> subsystem. It is actually an independent IP that is able to spy on the
> SoC pad. For that purpose, it can mux and filter (edge or level and
> polarity) any single SoC pad to one of the 8 GIC's interrupts it owns.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/Kconfig          |   9 +
>  drivers/irqchip/Makefile         |   1 +
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c | 423 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 433 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> index 82b0b5daf3f5..168837263e80 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> @@ -279,3 +279,12 @@ config EZNPS_GIC
>  config STM32_EXTI
>  	bool
>  	select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +
> +config MESON_GPIO_IRQ
> +       bool "Meson GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer"
> +       depends on ARCH_MESON || COMPILE_TEST
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN_HIERARCHY
> +       help
> +         Support Meson SoC Family GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer
> +
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> index e4dbfc85abdb..33f913d037d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> @@ -74,3 +74,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_LS_SCFG_MSI)		+= irq-ls-scfg-msi.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_EZNPS_GIC)			+= irq-eznps.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ASPEED)		+= irq-aspeed-vic.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_STM32_EXTI) 		+= irq-stm32-exti.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_MESON_GPIO_IRQ)		+= irq-meson-gpio.o
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..869b4df8c483
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,423 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2015 Endless Mobile, Inc.
> + * Author: Carlo Caione <carlo@endlessm.com>
> + * Copyright (c) 2016 BayLibre, SAS.
> + * Author: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public License as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> + * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
> + * General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program; if not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + * The full GNU General Public License is included in this distribution
> + * in the file called COPYING.
> + */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/irqchip.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +
> +#define IRQ_FREE (-1)
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL	0x00
> +#define REG_PIN_03_SEL	0x04
> +#define REG_PIN_47_SEL	0x08
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL	0x0c
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(x)	(BIT(x) | BIT(16 + (x)))
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(x)	BIT(x)
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(x)	BIT(16 + (x))
> +#define REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(x)	(((x) % 4) * 8)
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL_SHIFT(x)	((x) * 4)
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_params {
> +	unsigned int nhwirq;
> +	irq_hw_number_t *source;
> +	int nsource;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_domain {

The name of that structure is utterly confusing, as it doesn't contain
anything related to an IRQ domain. Can you please clarify its usage?

> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int *map;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data {
> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int index;
> +};
> +
> +static irq_hw_number_t meson_parent_hwirqs[] = {
> +	64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71,
> +};

If that a guarantee that these numbers will always represent the parent
interrupt? It feels a bit odd not to get that information directly from
the device tree, in the form of a device specific property. Something like:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 65 66 ... >;

or even as a base/range:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 8>;

Also, how does it work if you have more than a single device like this?
This driver seems a do a great deal of dynamic allocation, and yet its
core resource is completely static... Please pick a side! ;-)

> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 134,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),

I find it utterly confusing that you are calling source something that
is an output for this controller. It makes my brain melt, and I don't
like the feeling.

> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8b_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 119,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson_gxbb_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 133,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};

Same thing. How big is the variability of these structures? Are we going
to see more of those? or is that now set into stone?

+Mark: what's the policy to describe this kind of things?

> +
> +static const struct of_device_id meson_irq_gpio_matches[] = {
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",

If it's an independent IP (as described in the commit message),
shouldn't in be rescribed in a more SoC-independent way?

> +		.data = &meson8_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson8b_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson_gxbb_params
> +	},
> +	{}
> +};
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(void __iomem *base, unsigned int reg,
> +				       u32 mask, u32 val)
> +{
> +	u32 tmp;
> +
> +	tmp = readl(base + reg);
> +	tmp &= ~mask;
> +	tmp |= val;
> +
> +	writel(tmp, base + reg);

Can't you use the relaxed accessors?

> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_get_index(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				    int hwirq)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < domain_data->params->nsource; i++) {
> +		if (domain_data->map[i] == hwirq)
> +			return i;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -1;

I'm a bit worried by this function. If you need an allocator, then
having a simple bitmap is much better than iterating over an array.

If you're using this to go from a hwirq to the structure describing your
interrupt, this is wrong. You should never have to look-up something
based on a hwirq, because that's what irq domains are for.

> +}
> +
> +static int mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t hwirq,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t *source)
> +{
> +	int index;
> +	unsigned int reg;
> +
> +	index = meson_gpio_irq_get_index(domain_data, IRQ_FREE);

So assuming you turn this into a proper bitmap driven allocator...

> +	if (index < 0) {
> +		pr_err("No irq available\n");
> +		return -ENOSPC;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data->map[index] = hwirq;

this can go away, as there is hardly any point in tracking the hwirq on
its own. Actually, the whole map[] array looks totally useless.

> +
> +	reg = (index < 4) ? REG_PIN_03_SEL : REG_PIN_47_SEL;
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(domain_data->base, reg,
> +				   0xff << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index),
> +				   hwirq << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index));
> +
> +	*source = domain_data->params->source[index];
> +
> +	pr_debug("hwirq %lu assigned to channel %d - source %lu\n",
> +		 hwirq, index, *source);
> +
> +	return index;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(unsigned int type, void __iomem *base,
> +				     int index)
> +{
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +
> +	type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	if (type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(index);
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(index);
> +
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(base, REG_EDGE_POL,
> +				   REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(index), val);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int meson_gpio_irq_type_output(unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	unsigned int sense = type & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	type &= ~IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the polarity of interrupt is low, the controller will
> +	 * invert the signal for gic
> +	 */
> +	if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH;
> +	else if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
> +
> +	return type;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("set type of hwirq %lu to %u\n", data->hwirq, type);
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, cd->base, cd->index);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return irq_chip_set_type_parent(data,
> +					meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type));
> +}
> +
> +static struct irq_chip meson_gpio_irq_chip = {
> +	.name			= "meson-gpio-irqchip",
> +	.irq_mask		= irq_chip_mask_parent,
> +	.irq_unmask		= irq_chip_unmask_parent,
> +	.irq_eoi		= irq_chip_eoi_parent,
> +	.irq_set_type		= meson_gpio_irq_set_type,
> +	.irq_retrigger		= irq_chip_retrigger_hierarchy,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +	.irq_set_affinity	= irq_chip_set_affinity_parent,
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   struct irq_fwspec *fwspec,
> +					   unsigned long *hwirq,
> +					   unsigned int *type)
> +{
> +	if (is_of_node(fwspec->fwnode)) {
> +		if (fwspec->param_count != 2)
> +			return -EINVAL;

You can write this as:

	if (is_of_node() && fwspec->... == 2) {

> +
> +		*hwirq	= fwspec->param[0];
> +		*type	= fwspec->param[1];
> +
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   unsigned int virq,
> +					   irq_hw_number_t source,
> +					   unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec fwspec;
> +
> +	if (!irq_domain_get_of_node(domain->parent))
> +		return -EINVAL;

How can you end-up here if the translate operation has failed?

> +
> +	fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
> +	fwspec.param_count = 3;
> +	fwspec.param[0] = 0;	/* SPI */
> +	fwspec.param[1] = source;
> +	fwspec.param[2] = meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type);
> +
> +	return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, 1, &fwspec);
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs,
> +				       void *data)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	unsigned long hwirq, source;
> +	unsigned int type;
> +	int i, index, ret;
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(domain, fwspec, &hwirq, &type);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("irq %d, nr_irqs %d, hwirqs %lu\n", virq, nr_irqs, hwirq);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

This is a pattern that gets repeated over and over, for no good reason.
The only reason we have this nr_irqs thing is to handle things like
multi-MSI, where we have to *guarantee* that the hwirqs are allocated in
a contiguous manner.

Here, you don't enforce that guarantee, so you'd rather have a big fat:

	if (WARN_ON(nr_irqs != 1))
		return -EINVAL;

and get rid of that loop, because I cannot imagine a case where you'd
allocate more than a single interrupt@a time.

> +		index = mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(domain_data, hwirq + i,
> +						   &source);
> +		if (index < 0)
> +			return index;
> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, domain_data->base,
> +						index);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;

Why do you have to to this here? This should be handled by the core code
already.

> +
> +		cd = kzalloc(sizeof(*cd), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!cd)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +		cd->base = domain_data->base;
> +		cd->index = index;

So what is the exact purpose of this structure? The base address is
essentially a global, or could be directly derived from the domain. The
index is only used in set_type, and is the index of the pin connected to
the GIC. It looks to me like you could have:

		irq_hw_number_t *out_line = &meson_parent_hwirqs[index];

> +
> +		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> +					      &meson_gpio_irq_chip, cd);

and this written as

		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq, hwirq,
					      out_line);

In your set_type function, you just compute the index back:

	irq_hw_number_t *out_line = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
	irq_hw_number_t index = out_line - meson_parent_hwirqs;

and you're done.

> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(domain, virq + i,
> +						      source, type);

Resource leak on error.

> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	struct irq_data *irq_data;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

Same comment as above.

> +		irq_data = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq + i);
> +		cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(irq_data);
> +
> +		domain_data->map[cd->index] = IRQ_FREE;
> +		kfree(cd);
> +	}
> +
> +	irq_domain_free_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs);
> +
> +}
> +
> +static const struct irq_domain_ops meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops = {
> +	.alloc		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc,
> +	.free		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_free,
> +	.translate	= meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init
> +meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(struct device_node *node,
> +			   struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +			   const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int nsource = params->nsource;
> +	int *map;
> +
> +	map = kcalloc(nsource, sizeof(*map), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!map)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nsource; i++)
> +		map[i] = IRQ_FREE;
> +
> +	domain_data->map = map;

You should now be able to kill most or all of this.

> +	domain_data->params = params;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init meson_gpio_irq_of_init(struct device_node *node,
> +					 struct device_node *parent)
> +{
> +	struct irq_domain *domain, *parent_domain;
> +	const struct of_device_id *match;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	match = of_match_node(meson_irq_gpio_matches, node);
> +	if (!match)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	params = match->data;
> +
> +	if (!parent) {
> +		pr_err("missing parent interrupt node\n");
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	parent_domain = irq_find_host(parent);
> +	if (!parent_domain) {
> +		pr_err("unable to obtain parent domain\n");
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain_data), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!domain_data)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	domain_data->base = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +	if (!domain_data->base) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(node, domain_data, params);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +
> +	domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0, params->nhwirq,
> +					  node, &meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops,
> +					  domain_data);

Please be consistent in using the fwnode API instead of the of_node one.

> +
> +	if (!domain) {
> +		pr_err("failed to allocated domain\n");
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +	}
> +
> +	pr_info("%d to %d gpio interrupt mux initialized\n",
> +		params->nhwirq, params->nsource);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +out_free_dev_content:
> +	kfree(domain_data->map);
> +	iounmap(domain_data->base);
> +
> +out_free_dev:
> +	kfree(domain_data);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8b_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(gxbb_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> 

Overall, this driver is a bit of a mess. Tons of structures that don't
make much sense, and a false sense of being able to support multiple
instances of the device.

I'll let Mark comment on the DT side of things.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/9] irqchip: meson: add support for gpio interrupt controller
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:33:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ec297647-1ab7-7e6b-5945-be8360f92421@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1476890480-8884-2-git-send-email-jbrunet@baylibre.com>

Jerome,

On 19/10/16 16:21, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> Add support for the interrupt gpio controller found on Amlogic's meson
> SoC family.
> 
> Unlike what the IP name suggest, it is not directly linked to the gpio
> subsystem. It is actually an independent IP that is able to spy on the
> SoC pad. For that purpose, it can mux and filter (edge or level and
> polarity) any single SoC pad to one of the 8 GIC's interrupts it owns.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/Kconfig          |   9 +
>  drivers/irqchip/Makefile         |   1 +
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c | 423 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 433 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> index 82b0b5daf3f5..168837263e80 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
> @@ -279,3 +279,12 @@ config EZNPS_GIC
>  config STM32_EXTI
>  	bool
>  	select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +
> +config MESON_GPIO_IRQ
> +       bool "Meson GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer"
> +       depends on ARCH_MESON || COMPILE_TEST
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN
> +       select IRQ_DOMAIN_HIERARCHY
> +       help
> +         Support Meson SoC Family GPIO Interrupt Multiplexer
> +
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> index e4dbfc85abdb..33f913d037d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Makefile
> @@ -74,3 +74,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_LS_SCFG_MSI)		+= irq-ls-scfg-msi.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_EZNPS_GIC)			+= irq-eznps.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ASPEED)		+= irq-aspeed-vic.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_STM32_EXTI) 		+= irq-stm32-exti.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_MESON_GPIO_IRQ)		+= irq-meson-gpio.o
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..869b4df8c483
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-meson-gpio.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,423 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2015 Endless Mobile, Inc.
> + * Author: Carlo Caione <carlo@endlessm.com>
> + * Copyright (c) 2016 BayLibre, SAS.
> + * Author: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public License as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> + * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
> + * General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program; if not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> + * The full GNU General Public License is included in this distribution
> + * in the file called COPYING.
> + */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/irqchip.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +
> +#define IRQ_FREE (-1)
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL	0x00
> +#define REG_PIN_03_SEL	0x04
> +#define REG_PIN_47_SEL	0x08
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL	0x0c
> +
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(x)	(BIT(x) | BIT(16 + (x)))
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(x)	BIT(x)
> +#define REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(x)	BIT(16 + (x))
> +#define REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(x)	(((x) % 4) * 8)
> +#define REG_FILTER_SEL_SHIFT(x)	((x) * 4)
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_params {
> +	unsigned int nhwirq;
> +	irq_hw_number_t *source;
> +	int nsource;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_domain {

The name of that structure is utterly confusing, as it doesn't contain
anything related to an IRQ domain. Can you please clarify its usage?

> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int *map;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +};
> +
> +struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data {
> +	void __iomem *base;
> +	int index;
> +};
> +
> +static irq_hw_number_t meson_parent_hwirqs[] = {
> +	64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71,
> +};

If that a guarantee that these numbers will always represent the parent
interrupt? It feels a bit odd not to get that information directly from
the device tree, in the form of a device specific property. Something like:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 65 66 ... >;

or even as a base/range:

	upstream-interrupts = <64 8>;

Also, how does it work if you have more than a single device like this?
This driver seems a do a great deal of dynamic allocation, and yet its
core resource is completely static... Please pick a side! ;-)

> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 134,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),

I find it utterly confusing that you are calling source something that
is an output for this controller. It makes my brain melt, and I don't
like the feeling.

> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson8b_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 119,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct meson_gpio_irq_params meson_gxbb_params = {
> +	.nhwirq  = 133,
> +	.source  = meson_parent_hwirqs,
> +	.nsource = ARRAY_SIZE(meson_parent_hwirqs),
> +};

Same thing. How big is the variability of these structures? Are we going
to see more of those? or is that now set into stone?

+Mark: what's the policy to describe this kind of things?

> +
> +static const struct of_device_id meson_irq_gpio_matches[] = {
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",

If it's an independent IP (as described in the commit message),
shouldn't in be rescribed in a more SoC-independent way?

> +		.data = &meson8_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson8b_params
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		.data = &meson_gxbb_params
> +	},
> +	{}
> +};
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(void __iomem *base, unsigned int reg,
> +				       u32 mask, u32 val)
> +{
> +	u32 tmp;
> +
> +	tmp = readl(base + reg);
> +	tmp &= ~mask;
> +	tmp |= val;
> +
> +	writel(tmp, base + reg);

Can't you use the relaxed accessors?

> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_get_index(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				    int hwirq)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < domain_data->params->nsource; i++) {
> +		if (domain_data->map[i] == hwirq)
> +			return i;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -1;

I'm a bit worried by this function. If you need an allocator, then
having a simple bitmap is much better than iterating over an array.

If you're using this to go from a hwirq to the structure describing your
interrupt, this is wrong. You should never have to look-up something
based on a hwirq, because that's what irq domains are for.

> +}
> +
> +static int mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t hwirq,
> +				      irq_hw_number_t *source)
> +{
> +	int index;
> +	unsigned int reg;
> +
> +	index = meson_gpio_irq_get_index(domain_data, IRQ_FREE);

So assuming you turn this into a proper bitmap driven allocator...

> +	if (index < 0) {
> +		pr_err("No irq available\n");
> +		return -ENOSPC;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data->map[index] = hwirq;

this can go away, as there is hardly any point in tracking the hwirq on
its own. Actually, the whole map[] array looks totally useless.

> +
> +	reg = (index < 4) ? REG_PIN_03_SEL : REG_PIN_47_SEL;
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(domain_data->base, reg,
> +				   0xff << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index),
> +				   hwirq << REG_PIN_SEL_SHIFT(index));
> +
> +	*source = domain_data->params->source[index];
> +
> +	pr_debug("hwirq %lu assigned to channel %d - source %lu\n",
> +		 hwirq, index, *source);
> +
> +	return index;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(unsigned int type, void __iomem *base,
> +				     int index)
> +{
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +
> +	type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	if (type == IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_EDGE(index);
> +
> +	if (type & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		val |= REG_EDGE_POL_LOW(index);
> +
> +	meson_gpio_irq_update_bits(base, REG_EDGE_POL,
> +				   REG_EDGE_POL_MASK(index), val);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int meson_gpio_irq_type_output(unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	unsigned int sense = type & IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	type &= ~IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the polarity of interrupt is low, the controller will
> +	 * invert the signal for gic
> +	 */
> +	if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH;
> +	else if (sense & (IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING))
> +		type |= IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
> +
> +	return type;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("set type of hwirq %lu to %u\n", data->hwirq, type);
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, cd->base, cd->index);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return irq_chip_set_type_parent(data,
> +					meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type));
> +}
> +
> +static struct irq_chip meson_gpio_irq_chip = {
> +	.name			= "meson-gpio-irqchip",
> +	.irq_mask		= irq_chip_mask_parent,
> +	.irq_unmask		= irq_chip_unmask_parent,
> +	.irq_eoi		= irq_chip_eoi_parent,
> +	.irq_set_type		= meson_gpio_irq_set_type,
> +	.irq_retrigger		= irq_chip_retrigger_hierarchy,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +	.irq_set_affinity	= irq_chip_set_affinity_parent,
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   struct irq_fwspec *fwspec,
> +					   unsigned long *hwirq,
> +					   unsigned int *type)
> +{
> +	if (is_of_node(fwspec->fwnode)) {
> +		if (fwspec->param_count != 2)
> +			return -EINVAL;

You can write this as:

	if (is_of_node() && fwspec->... == 2) {

> +
> +		*hwirq	= fwspec->param[0];
> +		*type	= fwspec->param[1];
> +
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +					   unsigned int virq,
> +					   irq_hw_number_t source,
> +					   unsigned int type)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec fwspec;
> +
> +	if (!irq_domain_get_of_node(domain->parent))
> +		return -EINVAL;

How can you end-up here if the translate operation has failed?

> +
> +	fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
> +	fwspec.param_count = 3;
> +	fwspec.param[0] = 0;	/* SPI */
> +	fwspec.param[1] = source;
> +	fwspec.param[2] = meson_gpio_irq_type_output(type);
> +
> +	return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(domain, virq, 1, &fwspec);
> +}
> +
> +static int meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs,
> +				       void *data)
> +{
> +	struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	unsigned long hwirq, source;
> +	unsigned int type;
> +	int i, index, ret;
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate(domain, fwspec, &hwirq, &type);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pr_debug("irq %d, nr_irqs %d, hwirqs %lu\n", virq, nr_irqs, hwirq);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

This is a pattern that gets repeated over and over, for no good reason.
The only reason we have this nr_irqs thing is to handle things like
multi-MSI, where we have to *guarantee* that the hwirqs are allocated in
a contiguous manner.

Here, you don't enforce that guarantee, so you'd rather have a big fat:

	if (WARN_ON(nr_irqs != 1))
		return -EINVAL;

and get rid of that loop, because I cannot imagine a case where you'd
allocate more than a single interrupt@a time.

> +		index = mesion_gpio_irq_map_source(domain_data, hwirq + i,
> +						   &source);
> +		if (index < 0)
> +			return index;
> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_type_setup(type, domain_data->base,
> +						index);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;

Why do you have to to this here? This should be handled by the core code
already.

> +
> +		cd = kzalloc(sizeof(*cd), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!cd)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +		cd->base = domain_data->base;
> +		cd->index = index;

So what is the exact purpose of this structure? The base address is
essentially a global, or could be directly derived from the domain. The
index is only used in set_type, and is the index of the pin connected to
the GIC. It looks to me like you could have:

		irq_hw_number_t *out_line = &meson_parent_hwirqs[index];

> +
> +		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> +					      &meson_gpio_irq_chip, cd);

and this written as

		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq, hwirq,
					      out_line);

In your set_type function, you just compute the index back:

	irq_hw_number_t *out_line = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(data);
	irq_hw_number_t index = out_line - meson_parent_hwirqs;

and you're done.

> +
> +		ret = meson_gpio_irq_allocate_gic_irq(domain, virq + i,
> +						      source, type);

Resource leak on error.

> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void meson_gpio_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain,
> +				       unsigned int virq,
> +				       unsigned int nr_irqs)
> +{
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data = domain->host_data;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_chip_data *cd;
> +	struct irq_data *irq_data;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {

Same comment as above.

> +		irq_data = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq + i);
> +		cd = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(irq_data);
> +
> +		domain_data->map[cd->index] = IRQ_FREE;
> +		kfree(cd);
> +	}
> +
> +	irq_domain_free_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs);
> +
> +}
> +
> +static const struct irq_domain_ops meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops = {
> +	.alloc		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_alloc,
> +	.free		= meson_gpio_irq_domain_free,
> +	.translate	= meson_gpio_irq_domain_translate,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init
> +meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(struct device_node *node,
> +			   struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data,
> +			   const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int nsource = params->nsource;
> +	int *map;
> +
> +	map = kcalloc(nsource, sizeof(*map), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!map)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nsource; i++)
> +		map[i] = IRQ_FREE;
> +
> +	domain_data->map = map;

You should now be able to kill most or all of this.

> +	domain_data->params = params;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init meson_gpio_irq_of_init(struct device_node *node,
> +					 struct device_node *parent)
> +{
> +	struct irq_domain *domain, *parent_domain;
> +	const struct of_device_id *match;
> +	const struct meson_gpio_irq_params *params;
> +	struct meson_gpio_irq_domain *domain_data;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	match = of_match_node(meson_irq_gpio_matches, node);
> +	if (!match)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	params = match->data;
> +
> +	if (!parent) {
> +		pr_err("missing parent interrupt node\n");
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	parent_domain = irq_find_host(parent);
> +	if (!parent_domain) {
> +		pr_err("unable to obtain parent domain\n");
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +	}
> +
> +	domain_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain_data), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!domain_data)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	domain_data->base = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +	if (!domain_data->base) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = meson_gpio_irq_init_domain(node, domain_data, params);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +
> +	domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0, params->nhwirq,
> +					  node, &meson_gpio_irq_domain_ops,
> +					  domain_data);

Please be consistent in using the fwnode API instead of the of_node one.

> +
> +	if (!domain) {
> +		pr_err("failed to allocated domain\n");
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out_free_dev_content;
> +	}
> +
> +	pr_info("%d to %d gpio interrupt mux initialized\n",
> +		params->nhwirq, params->nsource);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +out_free_dev_content:
> +	kfree(domain_data->map);
> +	iounmap(domain_data->base);
> +
> +out_free_dev:
> +	kfree(domain_data);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(meson8b_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson8b-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(gxbb_gpio_intc, "amlogic,meson-gxbb-gpio-intc",
> +		meson_gpio_irq_of_init);
> 

Overall, this driver is a bit of a mess. Tons of structures that don't
make much sense, and a false sense of being able to support multiple
instances of the device.

I'll let Mark comment on the DT side of things.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-10-20 16:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-19 15:21 [PATCH v2 0/9] irqchip: meson: add support for the gpio interrupt controller Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] irqchip: meson: add support for " Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
     [not found]   ` <1476890480-8884-2-git-send-email-jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-20 16:33     ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2016-10-20 16:33       ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-20 16:33       ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-20 16:33       ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-21  8:49       ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-21  8:49         ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-21  8:49         ` Jerome Brunet
     [not found]         ` <1477039751.15560.88.camel-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-21 10:10           ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-21 10:10             ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-21 10:10             ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-21 10:10             ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-21 10:17             ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-21 10:17               ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-21 10:17               ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-21 10:17               ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-21 10:28         ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-21 10:28           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-21 10:28           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: add DT binding for meson GPIO " Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-26 21:42   ` Rob Herring
2016-10-26 21:42     ` Rob Herring
2016-10-26 21:42     ` Rob Herring
2016-10-27  9:32     ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-27  9:32       ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-27  9:32       ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-27  9:32       ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-27  9:40       ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-27  9:40         ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-27  9:40         ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-27  9:40         ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] pinctrl: meson: update pinctrl data with gpio irq data Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] pinctrl: meson: allow gpio to request irq Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
     [not found]   ` <1476890480-8884-5-git-send-email-jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-19 15:37     ` [RESEND PATCH " Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:37       ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:37       ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:37       ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] ARM: meson: enable MESON_IRQ_GPIO in Kconfig for meson8 Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
     [not found] ` <1476890480-8884-1-git-send-email-jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-19 15:21   ` [PATCH v2 5/9] dt-bindings: pinctrl: meson: update gpio dt-bindings Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` [PATCH v2 6/9] ARM64: meson: enable MESON_IRQ_GPIO in Kconfig Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-20 16:34     ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-20 16:34       ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-20 16:34       ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-19 15:21   ` [PATCH v2 8/9] ARM64: dts: amlogic: enable gpio interrupt controller on gxbb Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21     ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] ARM: dts: amlogic: enable gpio interrupt controller on meson8 Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-19 15:21   ` Jerome Brunet
2016-10-20 10:08 ` [PATCH v2 0/9] irqchip: meson: add support for the gpio interrupt controller Neil Armstrong

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=ec297647-1ab7-7e6b-5945-be8360f92421@arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier-5wv7dgnigg8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=Mark.Rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=carlo-KA+7E9HrN00dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=jason-NLaQJdtUoK4Be96aLqz0jA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=jbrunet-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=khilman-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-I+IVW8TIWO2tmTQ+vhA3Yw@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-amlogic-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.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.