RE: [PATCH V2 2/3] gpio: xilinx: Add interrupt support

[Srinivas Neeli]

Hi Andy Shevchenko,

Thanks for the review.

Accepted comments will address in V3 and Added few comments in inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 11:33 PM
> To: Srinivas Neeli <sneeli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>; Bartosz Golaszewski
> <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Michal Simek <michals@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhraj@xxxxxxxxxx>; Srinivas Goud
> <sgoud@xxxxxxxxxx>; open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM <linux-
> gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; git <git@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] gpio: xilinx: Add interrupt support
> 
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 5:08 PM Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> > Adds interrupt support to the Xilinx GPIO driver so that rising and
> > falling edge line events can be supported. Since interrupt support is
> > an optional feature in the Xilinx IP, the driver continues to support
> > devices which have no interrupt provided.
> 
> ...
> 
> > +#include <linux/irqchip/chained_irq.h>
> 
> Not sure I see a user of it.
> 
> ...
we are using chained_irq_enter() and chained_irq_exit()
APIs , so need "chained_irq.h"
> 
> > +/**
> > + * xgpio_xlate - Translate gpio_spec to the GPIO number and flags
> > + * @gc: Pointer to gpio_chip device structure.
> > + * @gpiospec:  gpio specifier as found in the device tree
> > + * @flags: A flags pointer based on binding
> > + *
> > + * Return:
> > + * irq number otherwise -EINVAL
> > + */
> > +static int xgpio_xlate(struct gpio_chip *gc,
> > +                      const struct of_phandle_args *gpiospec, u32
> > +*flags) {
> > +       if (gc->of_gpio_n_cells < 2) {
> > +               WARN_ON(1);
> > +               return -EINVAL;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       if (WARN_ON(gpiospec->args_count < gc->of_gpio_n_cells))
> > +               return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +       if (gpiospec->args[0] >= gc->ngpio)
> > +               return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +       if (flags)
> > +               *flags = gpiospec->args[1];
> > +
> > +       return gpiospec->args[0];
> > +}
> 
> This looks like a very standart xlate function for GPIO. Why do you need to
> open-code it?
> 
> ...
> 
> > +/**
> > + * xgpio_irq_ack - Acknowledge a child GPIO interrupt.
> 
> > + * This currently does nothing, but irq_ack is unconditionally called
> > + by
> > + * handle_edge_irq and therefore must be defined.
> 
> This should go after parameter description(s).
> 
> > + * @irq_data: per irq and chip data passed down to chip functions */
> 
> ...
> 
> >  /**
> > + * xgpio_irq_mask - Write the specified signal of the GPIO device.
> > + * @irq_data: per irq and chip data passed down to chip functions
> 
> In all comments irq -> IRQ.
> 
> > + */
> > +static void xgpio_irq_mask(struct irq_data *irq_data)
> > +{
> > +       unsigned long flags;
> > +       struct xgpio_instance *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(irq_data);
> > +       int irq_offset = irqd_to_hwirq(irq_data);
> > +       int index = xgpio_index(chip, irq_offset);
> > +       int offset = xgpio_offset(chip, irq_offset);
> > +
> > +       spin_lock_irqsave(&chip->gpio_lock, flags);
> > +
> 
> > +       chip->irq_enable[index] &= ~BIT(offset);
> 
> If you convert your data structure to use bitmaps (and respective API) like
> 
> #define XILINX_NGPIOS  64
> ...
>   DECLARE_BITMAP(irq_enable, XILINX_NGPIOS);
> ...
> 
> it will make code better to read and understand. For example, here it
> will be just
> __clear_bit(offset, chip->irq_enable);
> 
> > +       dev_dbg(chip->gc.parent, "Disable %d irq, irq_enable_mask 0x%x\n",
> > +               irq_offset, chip->irq_enable[index]);
> 
> Under spin lock?! Hmm...
> 
> > +       if (!chip->irq_enable[index]) {
> > +               /* Disable per channel interrupt */
> > +               u32 temp = xgpio_readreg(chip->regs + XGPIO_IPIER_OFFSET);
> > +
> > +               temp &= ~BIT(index);
> > +               xgpio_writereg(chip->regs + XGPIO_IPIER_OFFSET, temp);
> > +       }
> > +       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chip->gpio_lock, flags);
> > +}
> 
> ...
> 
> > +       for (index = 0; index < num_channels; index++) {
> > +               if ((status & BIT(index))) {
> 
> If gpio_width is the same among banks, you can use for_each_set_bit()
> here as well.
> 
> ...
gpio_wdith vary depends on design. We can configure gpio pins for each bank.

> 
> > +                       for_each_set_bit(bit, &all_events, 32) {
> > +                               generic_handle_irq(irq_find_mapping
> > +                                       (chip->gc.irq.domain, offset + bit));
> 
> Strange indentation. Maybe a temporary variable helps?
> 
> ...
> 
> > +       chip->irq = platform_get_irq_optional(pdev, 0);
> > +       if (chip->irq <= 0) {
> > +               dev_info(&pdev->dev, "GPIO IRQ not set\n");
> 
> Why do you need an optional variant if you print an error anyway?

Here intention is just printing a debug message to user.

> 
> > +       } else {
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> > +               chip->gc.irq.parents = (unsigned int *)&chip->irq;
> > +               chip->gc.irq.num_parents = 1;
> 
> Current pattern is to use devm_kcalloc() for it (Linus has plans to
> simplify this in the future and this will help him to find what
> patterns are being used)

I didn't get this , Could you please explain more.
> 
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko


Adding Robert Hancock to mail chain ( by mistake suppressed cc list) .

Hi Robert, 
Could you please provide your comments.

Thanks
Srinivas Neeli