Hi
> -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyng...@arm.com> > Sent: jeudi 7 mars 2019 17:40 > To: Fabien DESSENNE <fabien.desse...@st.com>; Thomas Gleixner > <t...@linutronix.de>; Jason Cooper <ja...@lakedaemon.net>; Maxime Coquelin > <mcoquelin.st...@gmail.com>; Alexandre TORGUE > <alexandre.tor...@st.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-stm32@st-md- > mailman.stormreply.com; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org > Cc: Benjamin GAIGNARD <benjamin.gaign...@st.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip: stm32: don't set rising configuration registers > at init > > On 07/03/2019 16:15, Fabien Dessenne wrote: > > The rising configuration status register (rtsr) is not banked. > > As it is shared with the co-processor, it should not be written at > > probe time, else the co-processor configuration will be lost. > > > > Signed-off-by: Fabien Dessenne <fabien.desse...@st.com> > > Fixes:? > > > --- > > drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 5 ----- > > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > index 6edfd4b..ff8a84f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > @@ -716,7 +716,6 @@ stm32_exti_chip_data *stm32_exti_chip_init(struct > stm32_exti_host_data *h_data, > > const struct stm32_exti_bank *stm32_bank; > > struct stm32_exti_chip_data *chip_data; > > void __iomem *base = h_data->base; > > - u32 irqs_mask; > > > > stm32_bank = h_data->drv_data->exti_banks[bank_idx]; > > chip_data = &h_data->chips_data[bank_idx]; @@ -725,10 +724,6 @@ > > stm32_exti_chip_data *stm32_exti_chip_init(struct stm32_exti_host_data > > *h_data, > > > > raw_spin_lock_init(&chip_data->rlock); > > > > - /* Determine number of irqs supported */ > > - writel_relaxed(~0UL, base + stm32_bank->rtsr_ofst); > > - irqs_mask = readl_relaxed(base + stm32_bank->rtsr_ofst); > > - > > And I guess you don't need to find out the number of supported IRQs? That's correct, this informed is useless : irqs_mask is never used (it used to be output in a log for debug purpose.and the log has been removed) > > Also, a handful of lines down, you're writing again to the same register. Why > isn't > that a problem? It's obviously a problem : another patch is missing, I am going to add it in v2. Thanks for pointing this out! > > > /* > > * This IP has no reset, so after hot reboot we should > > * clear registers to avoid residue > > > > Thanks, > > M. > -- > Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
