pinctrl: qcom: No need to read-modify-write the interrupt status
When the Qualcomm pinctrl driver wants to Ack an interrupt, it does a read-modify-write on the interrupt status register. On some SoCs it makes sure that the status bit is 1 to "Ack" and on others it makes sure that the bit is 0 to "Ack". Presumably the first type of interrupt controller is a "write 1 to clear" type register and the second just let you directly set the interrupt status register. As far as I can tell from scanning structure definitions, the interrupt status bit is always in a register by itself. Thus with both types of interrupt controllers it is safe to "Ack" interrupts without doing a read-modify-write. We can do a simple write. It should be noted that if the interrupt status bit _was_ ever in a register with other things (like maybe status bits for other GPIOs): a) For "write 1 clear" type controllers then read-modify-write would be totally wrong because we'd accidentally end up clearing interrupts we weren't looking at. b) For "direct set" type controllers then read-modify-write would also be wrong because someone setting one of the other bits in the register might accidentally clear (or set) our interrupt. I say this simply to show that the current read-modify-write doesn't provide any sort of "future proofing" of the code. In fact (for "write 1 clear" controllers) the new code is slightly more "future proof" since it would allow more than one interrupt status bits to share a register. NOTE: this code fixes no bugs--it simply avoids an extra register read. Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@codeaurora.org> Tested-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@codeaurora.org> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210114191601.v7.2.I3635de080604e1feda770591c5563bd6e63dd39d@changeid Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
a82e537807
commit
4079d35fa4
@ -791,16 +791,13 @@ static void msm_gpio_irq_clear_unmask(struct irq_data *d, bool status_clear)
|
||||
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pctrl->lock, flags);
|
||||
|
||||
if (status_clear) {
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* clear the interrupt status bit before unmask to avoid
|
||||
* any erroneous interrupts that would have got latched
|
||||
* when the interrupt is not in use.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
val = msm_readl_intr_status(pctrl, g);
|
||||
val &= ~BIT(g->intr_status_bit);
|
||||
msm_writel_intr_status(val, pctrl, g);
|
||||
}
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* clear the interrupt status bit before unmask to avoid
|
||||
* any erroneous interrupts that would have got latched
|
||||
* when the interrupt is not in use.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (status_clear)
|
||||
msm_writel_intr_status(0, pctrl, g);
|
||||
|
||||
val = msm_readl_intr_cfg(pctrl, g);
|
||||
val |= BIT(g->intr_raw_status_bit);
|
||||
@ -905,11 +902,7 @@ static void msm_gpio_irq_ack(struct irq_data *d)
|
||||
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pctrl->lock, flags);
|
||||
|
||||
val = msm_readl_intr_status(pctrl, g);
|
||||
if (g->intr_ack_high)
|
||||
val |= BIT(g->intr_status_bit);
|
||||
else
|
||||
val &= ~BIT(g->intr_status_bit);
|
||||
val = g->intr_ack_high ? BIT(g->intr_status_bit) : 0;
|
||||
msm_writel_intr_status(val, pctrl, g);
|
||||
|
||||
if (test_bit(d->hwirq, pctrl->dual_edge_irqs))
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user