On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Grygorii Strashko wrote:

> From: Naga Venkata Srikanth V <vnv.srika...@samsung.com>
> 
> 1) Removed request_irq() and replaced it with request_threaded_irq().
> 
> 2) Removed generic_handle_irq() and replaced it with
> handle_nested_irq().
>   Handling of these interrupts is nested, as we are handling an
> interrupt (for e.g rtc, mmc1) when we are still servicing TWL irq.
> 
> 3) Removed I2C read-retry logic for the case when twl_i2c_read() is
> failed inside IRQ handler - there is no sense to do that, so just report
> an error and return.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Naga Venkata Srikanth V <vnv.srika...@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg_Kosheliev <oleg.koshel...@ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.stras...@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c |  146 
> +++++++++++++++------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)

Besides the points I mention below I like the way this patch is
going.

> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c
> index 277a8db..b6030d9 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c
> @@ -90,7 +90,6 @@ static unsigned twl6030_irq_base;
>  static int twl_irq;
>  static bool twl_irq_wake_enabled;
>  
> -static struct completion irq_event;
>  static atomic_t twl6030_wakeirqs = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
>  
>  static int twl6030_irq_pm_notifier(struct notifier_block *notifier,
> @@ -131,95 +130,57 @@ static struct notifier_block 
> twl6030_irq_pm_notifier_block = {
>  };
>  
>  /*
> - * This thread processes interrupts reported by the Primary Interrupt 
> Handler.
> - */
> -static int twl6030_irq_thread(void *data)
> +* Threaded irq handler for the twl6030 interrupt.
> +* We query the interrupt controller in the twl6030 to determine
> +* which module is generating the interrupt request and call
> +* handle_nested_irq for that module.
> +*/
> +static irqreturn_t twl6030_irq_thread(int irq, void *data)
>  {
> -     long irq = (long)data;
> -     static unsigned i2c_errors;
> -     static const unsigned max_i2c_errors = 100;
> -     int ret;
> -
> -     while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
> -             int i;
> -             union {
> +     int i, ret;
> +     union {
>               u8 bytes[4];
>               u32 int_sts;
> -             } sts;
> -
> -             /* Wait for IRQ, then read PIH irq status (also blocking) */
> -             wait_for_completion_interruptible(&irq_event);
> -
> -             /* read INT_STS_A, B and C in one shot using a burst read */
> -             ret = twl_i2c_read(TWL_MODULE_PIH, sts.bytes,
> -                             REG_INT_STS_A, 3);
> -             if (ret) {
> -                     pr_warning("twl6030: I2C error %d reading PIH ISR\n",
> -                                     ret);
> -                     if (++i2c_errors >= max_i2c_errors) {
> -                             printk(KERN_ERR "Maximum I2C error count"
> -                                             " exceeded.  Terminating %s.\n",
> -                                             __func__);
> -                             break;
> -                     }
> -                     complete(&irq_event);
> -                     continue;
> -             }
> -
> +     } sts;
>  
> +     /* read INT_STS_A, B and C in one shot using a burst read */
> +     ret = twl_i2c_read(TWL_MODULE_PIH, sts.bytes, REG_INT_STS_A, 3);
> +     if (ret) {
> +             pr_warn("%s: I2C error %d reading PIH ISR\n", __func__, ret);

Does the user really care which function we're returning from.

Would it be better if you replace '__func__' with the device name?

> +             return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +     }
>  
> -             sts.bytes[3] = 0; /* Only 24 bits are valid*/
> +     sts.bytes[3] = 0; /* Only 24 bits are valid*/
>  
> -             /*
> -              * Since VBUS status bit is not reliable for VBUS disconnect
> -              * use CHARGER VBUS detection status bit instead.
> -              */
> -             if (sts.bytes[2] & 0x10)
> -                     sts.bytes[2] |= 0x08;
> +     /*
> +      * Since VBUS status bit is not reliable for VBUS disconnect
> +      * use CHARGER VBUS detection status bit instead.
> +      */
> +     if (sts.bytes[2] & 0x10)
> +             sts.bytes[2] |= 0x08;
>  
> -             for (i = 0; sts.int_sts; sts.int_sts >>= 1, i++) {
> -                     local_irq_disable();
> -                     if (sts.int_sts & 0x1) {
> -                             int module_irq = twl6030_irq_base +
> +     for (i = 0; sts.int_sts; sts.int_sts >>= 1, i++)
> +             if (sts.int_sts & 0x1) {

I'm a little confused by this. Where does sts.int_sts come from?

> +                     int module_irq = twl6030_irq_base +
>                                       twl6030_interrupt_mapping[i];
> -                             generic_handle_irq(module_irq);
> -
> -                     }
> -             local_irq_enable();
> +                     handle_nested_irq(module_irq);
> +                     pr_debug("%s: PIH ISR %u, virq%u\n",
> +                              __func__, i, module_irq);
>               }
>  
> -             /*
> -              * NOTE:
> -              * Simulation confirms that documentation is wrong w.r.t the
> -              * interrupt status clear operation. A single *byte* write to
> -              * any one of STS_A to STS_C register results in all three
> -              * STS registers being reset. Since it does not matter which
> -              * value is written, all three registers are cleared on a
> -              * single byte write, so we just use 0x0 to clear.
> -              */
> -             ret = twl_i2c_write_u8(TWL_MODULE_PIH, 0x00, REG_INT_STS_A);
> -             if (ret)
> -                     pr_warning("twl6030: I2C error in clearing PIH ISR\n");
> -
> -             enable_irq(irq);
> -     }
> -
> -     return 0;
> -}
> +     /*
> +      * NOTE:
> +      * Simulation confirms that documentation is wrong w.r.t the
> +      * interrupt status clear operation. A single *byte* write to
> +      * any one of STS_A to STS_C register results in all three
> +      * STS registers being reset. Since it does not matter which
> +      * value is written, all three registers are cleared on a
> +      * single byte write, so we just use 0x0 to clear.
> +      */
> +     ret = twl_i2c_write_u8(TWL_MODULE_PIH, 0x00, REG_INT_STS_A);
> +     if (ret)
> +             pr_warn("twl6030: I2C error in clearing PIH ISR\n");
>  
> -/*
> - * handle_twl6030_int() is the desc->handle method for the twl6030 interrupt.
> - * This is a chained interrupt, so there is no desc->action method for it.
> - * Now we need to query the interrupt controller in the twl6030 to determine
> - * which module is generating the interrupt request.  However, we can't do 
> i2c
> - * transactions in interrupt context, so we must defer that work to a kernel
> - * thread.  All we do here is acknowledge and mask the interrupt and wakeup
> - * the kernel thread.
> - */
> -static irqreturn_t handle_twl6030_pih(int irq, void *devid)
> -{
> -     disable_irq_nosync(irq);
> -     complete(devid);
>       return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  }
>  
> @@ -351,7 +312,6 @@ int twl6030_init_irq(struct device *dev, int irq_num)
>  {
>       struct                  device_node *node = dev->of_node;
>       int                     nr_irqs, irq_base, irq_end;
> -     struct task_struct      *task;
>       static struct irq_chip  twl6030_irq_chip;
>       int                     status = 0;
>       int                     i;
> @@ -396,36 +356,25 @@ int twl6030_init_irq(struct device *dev, int irq_num)
>               irq_set_chip_and_handler(i, &twl6030_irq_chip,
>                                        handle_simple_irq);
>               irq_set_chip_data(i, (void *)irq_num);
> +             irq_set_nested_thread(i, true);
>               activate_irq(i);
>       }
>  
> -     dev_info(dev, "PIH (irq %d) chaining IRQs %d..%d\n",
> -                     irq_num, irq_base, irq_end);
> +     dev_info(dev, "PIH (irq %d) nested IRQs %d..%d\n",
> +              irq_num, irq_base, irq_end);
>  
>       /* install an irq handler to demultiplex the TWL6030 interrupt */
> -     init_completion(&irq_event);
> -
> -     status = request_irq(irq_num, handle_twl6030_pih, 0, "TWL6030-PIH",
> -                          &irq_event);
> +     status = request_threaded_irq(irq_num, NULL, twl6030_irq_thread,
> +                                   IRQF_ONESHOT, "TWL6030-PIH", NULL);
>       if (status < 0) {
>               dev_err(dev, "could not claim irq %d: %d\n", irq_num, status);
>               goto fail_irq;
>       }
>  
> -     task = kthread_run(twl6030_irq_thread, (void *)irq_num, "twl6030-irq");
> -     if (IS_ERR(task)) {
> -             dev_err(dev, "could not create irq %d thread!\n", irq_num);
> -             status = PTR_ERR(task);
> -             goto fail_kthread;
> -     }
> -
>       twl_irq = irq_num;
>       register_pm_notifier(&twl6030_irq_pm_notifier_block);
>       return irq_base;
>  
> -fail_kthread:
> -     free_irq(irq_num, &irq_event);
> -
>  fail_irq:
>       for (i = irq_base; i < irq_end; i++)
>               irq_set_chip_and_handler(i, NULL, NULL);
> @@ -437,10 +386,13 @@ int twl6030_exit_irq(void)
>  {
>       unregister_pm_notifier(&twl6030_irq_pm_notifier_block);
>  
> -     if (twl6030_irq_base) {
> +     if (!twl6030_irq_base) {
>               pr_err("twl6030: can't yet clean up IRQs?\n");
>               return -ENOSYS;
>       }
> +
> +     free_irq(twl_irq, NULL);
> +

If request_threaded_irq() fails, isn't there a chance that
twl6030_irq_base will be allocated, but twl_irq will still be
undefined?

>       return 0;
>  }
>  

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to