| Message ID | 20220607110525.36922-1-aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | pinctrl: ingenic: Convert to immutable irq chip | expand |
Hi Aidan, Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : > Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: > > "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" > > Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 > ++++++++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c > b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c > index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c > @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { > struct ingenic_gpio_chip { > struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; > struct gpio_chip gc; > - struct irq_chip irq_chip; > unsigned int irq, reg_base; > }; > > @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct > irq_data *irqd) > struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); > int irq = irqd->hwirq; > > + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); > + > if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) > ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); > else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) > @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct > irq_data *irqd) > ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); > else > ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); > + > + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); > } > > static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) > @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct > irq_data *data) > return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); > } > > +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { > + .name = "gpio", > + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, > + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, > + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, > + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, > + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, > + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, > + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, > + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, > + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, > + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, > +}; > + > static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, > int pin, int func) > { > @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct > ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, > if (!jzgc->irq) > return -EINVAL; > > - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request; > - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release; > - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; > - > girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; > - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; > + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that? You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip; jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip); Thoughts? Cheers, -Paul > girq->parent_handler = ingenic_gpio_irq_handler; > girq->num_parents = 1; > girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*girq->parents), > -- > 2.35.1 >
Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> writes: > Hi Aidan, > > Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald > <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >> Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: >> "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" >> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> >> --- >> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++------------- >> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >> index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >> @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { >> struct ingenic_gpio_chip { >> struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; >> struct gpio_chip gc; >> - struct irq_chip irq_chip; >> unsigned int irq, reg_base; >> }; >> @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct irq_data >> *irqd) >> struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); >> int irq = irqd->hwirq; >> + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); >> + >> if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) >> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); >> else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) >> @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct irq_data >> *irqd) >> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); >> else >> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); >> + >> + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); >> } >> static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) >> @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct irq_data >> *data) >> return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); >> } >> +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { >> + .name = "gpio", >> + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, >> + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, >> + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, >> + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, >> + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, >> + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, >> + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, >> + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, >> + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, >> + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, >> +}; >> + >> static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >> int pin, int func) >> { >> @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct >> ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >> if (!jzgc->irq) >> return -EINVAL; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release; >> - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; >> - >> girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; >> - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; >> + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); > > This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that? > > You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is > jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip; > jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; > gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip); > > Thoughts? > > Cheers, > -Paul > I wondered that myself, but it doesn't seem to affect anything except what is displayed in /proc/interrupts. Is the name used anywhere else where it might cause confusion? The only similar case I could find was pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c where microchip_sgpio_register_bank() is called in a loop and registers the same irq chip repeatedly, so it's probably(?) okay to do this here. It seems to defeat the point of immutable irqchips if they just have to be copied anyway... (btw, I did remove jzgc->irq_chip -- or did I miss something?) Best regards, Aidan >> girq->parent_handler = ingenic_gpio_irq_handler; >> girq->num_parents = 1; >> girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*girq->parents), >> -- >> 2.35.1 >>
Hi Aidan, Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 17:47:19 +0100, Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> writes: > >> Hi Aidan, >> >> Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald >> <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >>> Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: >>> "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" >>> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 >>> ++++++++++++++++++------------- >>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>> index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>> @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { >>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip { >>> struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; >>> struct gpio_chip gc; >>> - struct irq_chip irq_chip; >>> unsigned int irq, reg_base; >>> }; >>> @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct >>> irq_data >>> *irqd) >>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); >>> int irq = irqd->hwirq; >>> + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); >>> + >>> if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) >>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); >>> else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) >>> @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct >>> irq_data >>> *irqd) >>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); >>> else >>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); >>> + >>> + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); >>> } >>> static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) >>> @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct >>> irq_data >>> *data) >>> return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); >>> } >>> +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { >>> + .name = "gpio", >>> + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, >>> + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, >>> + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, >>> + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, >>> + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, >>> + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, >>> + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, >>> + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, >>> + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, >>> + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, >>> +}; >>> + >>> static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>> int pin, int func) >>> { >>> @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct >>> ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>> if (!jzgc->irq) >>> return -EINVAL; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release; >>> - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; >>> - >>> girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; >>> - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; >>> + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); >> >> This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that? >> >> You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is >> jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip; >> jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >> gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip); >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Cheers, >> -Paul >> > > I wondered that myself, but it doesn't seem to affect anything except > what is displayed in /proc/interrupts. Is the name used anywhere else > where it might cause confusion? I don't really know. If it only really affects the display in /proc/interrupts then I'm fine with it. In doubt, I'd prefer to keep the existing names. > The only similar case I could find was pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c where > microchip_sgpio_register_bank() is called in a loop and registers the > same irq chip repeatedly, so it's probably(?) okay to do this here. It > seems to defeat the point of immutable irqchips if they just have to > be > copied anyway... The point of immutable irqchips is that they aren't modified by the core, if I understand it correctly. Immutable doesn't mean it has to be static const. > (btw, I did remove jzgc->irq_chip -- or did I miss something?) Oops, missed that. Cheers, -Paul > Best regards, > Aidan > >>> girq->parent_handler = ingenic_gpio_irq_handler; >>> girq->num_parents = 1; >>> girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*girq->parents), >>> -- >>> 2.35.1 >>> >
On 2022-06-09 11:00, Paul Cercueil wrote: > Hi Aidan, > > Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 17:47:19 +0100, Aidan MacDonald > <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >> >> Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> writes: >> >>> Hi Aidan, >>> >>> Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald >>> <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>> Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: >>>> "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" >>>> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>> index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>> @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { >>>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip { >>>> struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; >>>> struct gpio_chip gc; >>>> - struct irq_chip irq_chip; >>>> unsigned int irq, reg_base; >>>> }; >>>> @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct >>>> irq_data >>>> *irqd) >>>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); >>>> int irq = irqd->hwirq; >>>> + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); >>>> + >>>> if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) >>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); >>>> else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) >>>> @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct >>>> irq_data >>>> *irqd) >>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); >>>> else >>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); >>>> + >>>> + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); >>>> } >>>> static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) >>>> @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct >>>> irq_data >>>> *data) >>>> return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); >>>> } >>>> +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { >>>> + .name = "gpio", >>>> + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, >>>> + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, >>>> + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, >>>> + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, >>>> + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, >>>> + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, >>>> + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, >>>> + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, >>>> + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, >>>> + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>>> int pin, int func) >>>> { >>>> @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct >>>> ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>>> if (!jzgc->irq) >>>> return -EINVAL; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release; >>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; >>>> - >>>> girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; >>>> - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; >>>> + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); >>> >>> This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that? >>> >>> You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is >>> jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip; >>> jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>> gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip); >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Paul >>> >> >> I wondered that myself, but it doesn't seem to affect anything except >> what is displayed in /proc/interrupts. Is the name used anywhere else >> where it might cause confusion? > > I don't really know. If it only really affects the display in > /proc/interrupts then I'm fine with it. In doubt, I'd prefer to keep > the existing names. > >> The only similar case I could find was pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c where >> microchip_sgpio_register_bank() is called in a loop and registers the >> same irq chip repeatedly, so it's probably(?) okay to do this here. It >> seems to defeat the point of immutable irqchips if they just have to >> be >> copied anyway... > > The point of immutable irqchips is that they aren't modified by the > core, if I understand it correctly. Immutable doesn't mean it has to > be static const. I want these to be made const. I agree that the fancy string should be kept (sadly), as it is a userspace visible change, and we don't do that. You can solve it using the irq_print_chip() callback as part of your irq_chip structures. See 3344265a2692 for an example. Thanks, M.
Hi Marc, Le jeu., juin 9 2022 at 13:08:53 +0100, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> a écrit : > On 2022-06-09 11:00, Paul Cercueil wrote: >> Hi Aidan, >> >> Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 17:47:19 +0100, Aidan MacDonald >> <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >>> >>> Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> writes: >>> >>>> Hi Aidan, >>>> >>>> Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald >>>> <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>>> Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this >>>>> warning: >>>>> "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" >>>>> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++------------- >>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { >>>>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip { >>>>> struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; >>>>> struct gpio_chip gc; >>>>> - struct irq_chip irq_chip; >>>>> unsigned int irq, reg_base; >>>>> }; >>>>> @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct >>>>> irq_data >>>>> *irqd) >>>>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); >>>>> int irq = irqd->hwirq; >>>>> + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); >>>>> + >>>>> if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) >>>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); >>>>> else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) >>>>> @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void >>>>> ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct irq_data >>>>> *irqd) >>>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); >>>>> else >>>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); >>>>> + >>>>> + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); >>>>> } >>>>> static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) >>>>> @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void >>>>> ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct irq_data >>>>> *data) >>>>> return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); >>>>> } >>>>> +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { >>>>> + .name = "gpio", >>>>> + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, >>>>> + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, >>>>> + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, >>>>> + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, >>>>> + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, >>>>> + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, >>>>> + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, >>>>> + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, >>>>> + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, >>>>> + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl >>>>> *jzpc, >>>>> int pin, int func) >>>>> { >>>>> @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init >>>>> ingenic_gpio_probe(struct >>>>> ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>>>> if (!jzgc->irq) >>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = >>>>> ingenic_gpio_irq_request; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = >>>>> ingenic_gpio_irq_release; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; >>>>> - >>>>> girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; >>>>> - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; >>>>> + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); >>>> >>>> This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that? >>>> >>>> You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is >>>> jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip; >>>> jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>>> gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip); >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Paul >>>> >>> >>> I wondered that myself, but it doesn't seem to affect anything >>> except >>> what is displayed in /proc/interrupts. Is the name used anywhere >>> else >>> where it might cause confusion? >> >> I don't really know. If it only really affects the display in >> /proc/interrupts then I'm fine with it. In doubt, I'd prefer to keep >> the existing names. >> >>> The only similar case I could find was pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c >>> where >>> microchip_sgpio_register_bank() is called in a loop and registers >>> the >>> same irq chip repeatedly, so it's probably(?) okay to do this here. >>> It >>> seems to defeat the point of immutable irqchips if they just have >>> to be >>> copied anyway... >> >> The point of immutable irqchips is that they aren't modified by the >> core, if I understand it correctly. Immutable doesn't mean it has to >> be static const. > > I want these to be made const. I agree that the fancy string should > be kept (sadly), as it is a userspace visible change, and we don't > do that. > > You can solve it using the irq_print_chip() callback as part of > your irq_chip structures. See 3344265a2692 for an example. Works for me. Cheers, -Paul
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> writes: > On 2022-06-09 11:00, Paul Cercueil wrote: >> Hi Aidan, >> Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 17:47:19 +0100, Aidan MacDonald >> <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >>> Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> writes: >>> >>>> Hi Aidan, >>>> Le mar., juin 7 2022 at 12:05:25 +0100, Aidan MacDonald >>>> <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>>> Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: >>>>> "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" >>>>> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++------------- >>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c >>>>> @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { >>>>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip { >>>>> struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; >>>>> struct gpio_chip gc; >>>>> - struct irq_chip irq_chip; >>>>> unsigned int irq, reg_base; >>>>> }; >>>>> @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct irq_data >>>>> *irqd) >>>>> struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); >>>>> int irq = irqd->hwirq; >>>>> + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); >>>>> + >>>>> if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) >>>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); >>>>> else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) >>>>> @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct >>>>> irq_data >>>>> *irqd) >>>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); >>>>> else >>>>> ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); >>>>> + >>>>> + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); >>>>> } >>>>> static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) >>>>> @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct >>>>> irq_data >>>>> *data) >>>>> return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); >>>>> } >>>>> +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { >>>>> + .name = "gpio", >>>>> + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, >>>>> + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, >>>>> + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, >>>>> + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, >>>>> + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, >>>>> + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, >>>>> + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, >>>>> + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, >>>>> + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, >>>>> + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>>>> int pin, int func) >>>>> { >>>>> @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct >>>>> ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, >>>>> if (!jzgc->irq) >>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release; >>>>> - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; >>>>> - >>>>> girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; >>>>> - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; >>>>> + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); >>>> This will change each irq_chip's name to "gpio", do we want that? >>>> You didn't remove jzgc->irq_chip, so maybe what you could do is >>>> jzgc->irq_chip = ingenic_gpio_irqchip; >>>> jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; >>>> gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &jzgc->irq_chip); >>>> Thoughts? >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Paul >>>> >>> I wondered that myself, but it doesn't seem to affect anything except >>> what is displayed in /proc/interrupts. Is the name used anywhere else >>> where it might cause confusion? >> I don't really know. If it only really affects the display in >> /proc/interrupts then I'm fine with it. In doubt, I'd prefer to keep >> the existing names. >> >>> The only similar case I could find was pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c where >>> microchip_sgpio_register_bank() is called in a loop and registers the >>> same irq chip repeatedly, so it's probably(?) okay to do this here. It >>> seems to defeat the point of immutable irqchips if they just have to be >>> copied anyway... >> The point of immutable irqchips is that they aren't modified by the >> core, if I understand it correctly. Immutable doesn't mean it has to >> be static const. > > I want these to be made const. I agree that the fancy string should > be kept (sadly), as it is a userspace visible change, and we don't > do that. > > You can solve it using the irq_print_chip() callback as part of > your irq_chip structures. See 3344265a2692 for an example. > > Thanks, > > M. Thanks for the tip! I'll do that and send a v2.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:53 PM Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> wrote: > > Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: > > "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" ... > int irq = irqd->hwirq; Consider switching to irq_hw_number_t with irqd_to_hwirq() (in a separate patch) as pointed out in the documentation.
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c index 1ca11616db74..37258fb05be3 100644 --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ struct ingenic_pinctrl { struct ingenic_gpio_chip { struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc; struct gpio_chip gc; - struct irq_chip irq_chip; unsigned int irq, reg_base; }; @@ -3419,6 +3418,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_enable(struct irq_data *irqd) struct ingenic_gpio_chip *jzgc = gpiochip_get_data(gc); int irq = irqd->hwirq; + gpiochip_enable_irq(gc, irq); + if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4770)) ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4770_GPIO_INT, irq, true); else if (is_soc_or_above(jzgc->jzpc, ID_JZ4740)) @@ -3443,6 +3444,8 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_disable(struct irq_data *irqd) ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4740_GPIO_SELECT, irq, false); else ingenic_gpio_set_bit(jzgc, JZ4730_GPIO_GPIER, irq, false); + + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, irq); } static void ingenic_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *irqd) @@ -3684,6 +3687,20 @@ static void ingenic_gpio_irq_release(struct irq_data *data) return gpiochip_relres_irq(gpio_chip, data->hwirq); } +static const struct irq_chip ingenic_gpio_irqchip = { + .name = "gpio", + .irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable, + .irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable, + .irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask, + .irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask, + .irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack, + .irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type, + .irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake, + .irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request, + .irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release, + .flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND | IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE, +}; + static int ingenic_pinmux_set_pin_fn(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, int pin, int func) { @@ -4172,20 +4189,8 @@ static int __init ingenic_gpio_probe(struct ingenic_pinctrl *jzpc, if (!jzgc->irq) return -EINVAL; - jzgc->irq_chip.name = jzgc->gc.label; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_enable = ingenic_gpio_irq_enable; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_disable = ingenic_gpio_irq_disable; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_unmask = ingenic_gpio_irq_unmask; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_mask = ingenic_gpio_irq_mask; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_ack = ingenic_gpio_irq_ack; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_type = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_type; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_set_wake = ingenic_gpio_irq_set_wake; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_request_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_request; - jzgc->irq_chip.irq_release_resources = ingenic_gpio_irq_release; - jzgc->irq_chip.flags = IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND; - girq = &jzgc->gc.irq; - girq->chip = &jzgc->irq_chip; + gpio_irq_chip_set_chip(girq, &ingenic_gpio_irqchip); girq->parent_handler = ingenic_gpio_irq_handler; girq->num_parents = 1; girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(dev, 1, sizeof(*girq->parents),
Update the driver to use an immutable IRQ chip to fix this warning: "not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it!" Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com> --- drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)