From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209DCC64E7B for ; Mon, 30 Nov 2020 11:22:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9DB520855 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 2020 11:22:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727341AbgK3LWb (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2020 06:22:31 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:6542 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725902AbgK3LWa (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2020 06:22:30 -0500 IronPort-SDR: lTl7Uu+9OB1motRnm87W/Ps42boK3+pP3zSCpD7CS9LG4lA8GyMZG2mhTp6bSCaevMpS/3oVS4 YnGfjYrLEKFw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9820"; a="170055971" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,381,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="170055971" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Nov 2020 03:21:50 -0800 IronPort-SDR: s6bBcD5XXuH8CcyHYxPeLfKyKFHJqkNDMGls2aIuhl6c18vpFzFDk+kn6McJ5BVaLyD9uUBAmc c0ZP197bSHhQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,381,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="480619113" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.40]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Nov 2020 03:21:48 -0800 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kjhGc-00B1xM-2x; Mon, 30 Nov 2020 13:22:50 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 13:22:50 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Luo Jiaxing Cc: bgolaszewski@baylibre.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxarm@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] gpio: dwapb: mask/unmask IRQ when disable/enable it Message-ID: <20201130112250.GK4077@smile.fi.intel.com> References: <1606728979-44259-1-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1606728979-44259-1-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:36:19PM +0800, Luo Jiaxing wrote: > The mask and unmask registers are not configured in dwapb_irq_enable() and > dwapb_irq_disable(). In the following situations, the IRQ will be masked by > default after the IRQ is enabled: > > mask IRQ -> disable IRQ -> enable IRQ > > In this case, the IRQ status of GPIO controller is inconsistent with it's > irq_data too. For example, in __irq_enable(), IRQD_IRQ_DISABLED and > IRQD_IRQ_MASKED are both clear, but GPIO controller do not perform unmask. Sounds a bit like a papering over the issue which is slightly different. Can you elaborate more, why ->irq_mask() / ->irq_unmask() are not being called? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko