On 11/08/16 14:29, Jon Hunter wrote:
>
> On 11/08/16 13:46, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 11/08/16 10:47, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/08/16 09:37, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> On 08/08/16 22:48, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 1:45 AM, John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -614,7 +615,11 @@ unsigned int irq_create_fwspec_mapping(struct
>>>>>> irq_fwspec *fwspec)
>>>>>> * it now and return the interrupt number.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> if (irq_get_trigger_type(virq) == IRQ_TYPE_NONE) {
>>>>>> - irq_set_irq_type(virq, type);
>>>>>> + irq_data = irq_get_irq_data(virq);
>>>>>> + if (!irq_data)
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + irqd_set_trigger_type(irq_data, type);
>>>>>> return virq;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I revert just that, it works again.
>>>>>
>>>>> This makes my platform work too.
>>>>> Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm. I'm now booting your kernel on the APQ8060, and reverting this
>>>> hunk doesn't fix it for me. I'm confused...
>>>>
>>>> The interesting part is this:
>>>> 109: 100000 0 msmgpio 88 Level (null)
>>>
>>> 88 is the pm8058 parent interrupt and so I am surprised you would even
>>> see this in /proc/interrupts as it should be a chained interrupt, right?
>>>
>>> Are you seeing this with all the ethernet updates for the APQ8060 in
>>> Linus' branch? I am curious what you see with stock v4.8-rc1 and if
>>> interrupts work ok with the change I had proposed. Hard to tell if there
>>> is more than one issue here.
>>
>> Nailed the sucker:
>
> Great!
>
>> diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> index b4c1bc7..9d7284a 100644
>> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> @@ -820,6 +820,18 @@ __irq_do_set_handler(struct irq_desc *desc,
>> irq_flow_handler_t handle,
>> desc->name = name;
>>
>> if (handle != handle_bad_irq && is_chained) {
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = __irq_set_trigger(desc,
>> + irqd_get_trigger_type(&desc->irq_data));
>> + WARN_ON(ret);
>
> You could wrap the entire call in the WARN_ON(). I was not sure if there
> was a better way to handle that.
Actually, I've decided to drop it. We already have a message in
__irq_set_trigger(), and if we really want to scream, that's the one we
should consider upgrading to a WARN_ON().
>
>> + /*
>> + * This is beyond ugly: .set_type may have overridden
>> + * the flow, not not knowing that we're dealing with a
>> + * chained handler. Reset it here because we know
>> + * better.
>> + */
>> + desc->handle_irq = handle;
>
> Yes I see the call to irq_set_handler in the pinctrl-msm.c set_type.
> Good catch!
I can't believe it took me that much time to realize that. Guess I need
an extended weekend! ;-)
>
> Apart from the above ...
>
> Acked-by: Jon Hunter <jonath...@nvidia.com>
Thanks a lot Jon,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
