Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
when we have multiple instances of this driver.
Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
---
drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
index 8971fc54e974..c24d49d436ce 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static int iproc_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
irqc = &chip->irqchip;
- irqc->name = "bcm-iproc-gpio";
+ irqc->name = dev_name(dev);
irqc->irq_ack = iproc_gpio_irq_ack;
irqc->irq_mask = iproc_gpio_irq_mask;
irqc->irq_unmask = iproc_gpio_irq_unmask;
--
2.23.0
looks fine
On 2019-10-02 5:03 p.m., Chris Packham wrote:
> Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
> when we have multiple instances of this driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Scott Branden <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> index 8971fc54e974..c24d49d436ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static int iproc_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
>
> irqc = &chip->irqchip;
> - irqc->name = "bcm-iproc-gpio";
> + irqc->name = dev_name(dev);
> irqc->irq_ack = iproc_gpio_irq_ack;
> irqc->irq_mask = iproc_gpio_irq_mask;
> irqc->irq_unmask = iproc_gpio_irq_unmask;
On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:03 AM Chris Packham
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
> when we have multiple instances of this driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
Patch applied.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Hi Chris,
CC MarcZ
On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:03 AM Chris Packham
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
> when we have multiple instances of this driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
A while ago, Marc Zyngier pointed out that the irq_chip .name field
should contain the device's class name, not the instance's name.
Hence the current code is correct?
See also "[PATCH 0/4] irqchip: renesas: Use proper irq_chip name and parent"
(https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/)
Note that the irqchip patches in that series have been applied; the gpio
patches haven't been applied yet.
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static int iproc_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
>
> irqc = &chip->irqchip;
> - irqc->name = "bcm-iproc-gpio";
> + irqc->name = dev_name(dev);
> irqc->irq_ack = iproc_gpio_irq_ack;
> irqc->irq_mask = iproc_gpio_irq_mask;
> irqc->irq_unmask = iproc_gpio_irq_unmask;
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 08:30:50 +0100,
Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> CC MarcZ
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:03 AM Chris Packham
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
> > when we have multiple instances of this driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
>
> A while ago, Marc Zyngier pointed out that the irq_chip .name field
> should contain the device's class name, not the instance's name.
> Hence the current code is correct?
Thanks Geert for looping me in. The main reasons why I oppose this
kind of "let's show as much information as we can in /proc/interrupts"
are:
- It clutters the output badly: the formatting of this file, which is
bad enough when you have a small number of CPUs, becomes unreadable
when you have a large number of them *and* stupidly long strings
that only make sense on a given platform.
- Like it or not, /proc is ABI. We don't change things randomly there
without a good reason, and debugging isn't one of them.
- Debug information belongs to debugfs, where we already have plenty
of stuff (see CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_DEBUGFS). I'd rather we improve
this infrastructure if needed, rather than add platform specific
hacks.
</rant>
Thanks,
M.
>
> See also "[PATCH 0/4] irqchip: renesas: Use proper irq_chip name and parent"
> (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/)
> Note that the irqchip patches in that series have been applied; the gpio
> patches haven't been applied yet.
>
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> > @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static int iproc_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
> >
> > irqc = &chip->irqchip;
> > - irqc->name = "bcm-iproc-gpio";
> > + irqc->name = dev_name(dev);
> > irqc->irq_ack = iproc_gpio_irq_ack;
> > irqc->irq_mask = iproc_gpio_irq_mask;
> > irqc->irq_unmask = iproc_gpio_irq_unmask;
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>
--
Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny.
On 2019-10-07 1:14 a.m., Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 08:30:50 +0100,
> Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> CC MarcZ
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:03 AM Chris Packham
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
>>> when we have multiple instances of this driver.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
>> A while ago, Marc Zyngier pointed out that the irq_chip .name field
>> should contain the device's class name, not the instance's name.
>> Hence the current code is correct?
> Thanks Geert for looping me in. The main reasons why I oppose this
> kind of "let's show as much information as we can in /proc/interrupts"
> are:
>
> - It clutters the output badly: the formatting of this file, which is
> bad enough when you have a small number of CPUs, becomes unreadable
> when you have a large number of them *and* stupidly long strings
> that only make sense on a given platform.
>
> - Like it or not, /proc is ABI. We don't change things randomly there
> without a good reason, and debugging isn't one of them.
>
> - Debug information belongs to debugfs, where we already have plenty
> of stuff (see CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_DEBUGFS). I'd rather we improve
> this infrastructure if needed, rather than add platform specific
> hacks.
>
> </rant>
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
Thanks Marc/Geert. Sounds like we should drop patch 2 from series.
>
>> See also "[PATCH 0/4] irqchip: renesas: Use proper irq_chip name and parent"
>> (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/)
>> Note that the irqchip patches in that series have been applied; the gpio
>> patches haven't been applied yet.
>>
>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
>>> @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static int iproc_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
>>>
>>> irqc = &chip->irqchip;
>>> - irqc->name = "bcm-iproc-gpio";
>>> + irqc->name = dev_name(dev);
>>> irqc->irq_ack = iproc_gpio_irq_ack;
>>> irqc->irq_mask = iproc_gpio_irq_mask;
>>> irqc->irq_unmask = iproc_gpio_irq_unmask;
>> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>>
>> Geert
>>
>> --
>> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
>>
>> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
>> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>> -- Linus Torvalds
>>
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 10:14 AM Marc Zyngier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 08:30:50 +0100,
> Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > CC MarcZ
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:03 AM Chris Packham
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
> > > when we have multiple instances of this driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
> >
> > A while ago, Marc Zyngier pointed out that the irq_chip .name field
> > should contain the device's class name, not the instance's name.
> > Hence the current code is correct?
>
> Thanks Geert for looping me in. The main reasons why I oppose this
> kind of "let's show as much information as we can in /proc/interrupts"
> are:
>
> - It clutters the output badly: the formatting of this file, which is
> bad enough when you have a small number of CPUs, becomes unreadable
> when you have a large number of them *and* stupidly long strings
> that only make sense on a given platform.
>
> - Like it or not, /proc is ABI. We don't change things randomly there
> without a good reason, and debugging isn't one of them.
>
> - Debug information belongs to debugfs, where we already have plenty
> of stuff (see CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_DEBUGFS). I'd rather we improve
> this infrastructure if needed, rather than add platform specific
> hacks.
>
> </rant>
I have reverted the patch.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Hi LinusW, Scott, Geert, MarcZ,
On Mon, 2019-10-07 at 10:10 -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
>
> On 2019-10-07 1:14 a.m., Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 08:30:50 +0100,
> > Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hi Chris,
> > >
> > > CC MarcZ
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:03 AM Chris Packham
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Use the dev_name(dev) for the irqc->name so that we get unique names
> > > > when we have multiple instances of this driver.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > A while ago, Marc Zyngier pointed out that the irq_chip .name field
> > > should contain the device's class name, not the instance's name.
> > > Hence the current code is correct?
> >
> > Thanks Geert for looping me in. The main reasons why I oppose this
> > kind of "let's show as much information as we can in /proc/interrupts"
> > are:
> >
> > - It clutters the output badly: the formatting of this file, which is
> > bad enough when you have a small number of CPUs, becomes unreadable
> > when you have a large number of them *and* stupidly long strings
> > that only make sense on a given platform.
> >
> > - Like it or not, /proc is ABI. We don't change things randomly there
> > without a good reason, and debugging isn't one of them.
> >
> > - Debug information belongs to debugfs, where we already have plenty
> > of stuff (see CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_DEBUGFS). I'd rather we improve
> > this infrastructure if needed, rather than add platform specific
> > hacks.
> >
> > </rant>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > M.
>
> Thanks Marc/Geert. Sounds like we should drop patch 2 from series.
Sorry for not responding earlier (I was on vacation for a week). I'm
fine with dropping this patch.
> >
> > > See also "[PATCH 0/4] irqchip: renesas: Use proper irq_chip name and parent"
> > > (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/)
> > > Note that the irqchip patches in that series have been applied; the gpio
> > > patches haven't been applied yet.
> > >
> > > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c
> > > > @@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static int iproc_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > > struct gpio_irq_chip *girq;
> > > >
> > > > irqc = &chip->irqchip;
> > > > - irqc->name = "bcm-iproc-gpio";
> > > > + irqc->name = dev_name(dev);
> > > > irqc->irq_ack = iproc_gpio_irq_ack;
> > > > irqc->irq_mask = iproc_gpio_irq_mask;
> > > > irqc->irq_unmask = iproc_gpio_irq_unmask;
> > >
> > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> > >
> > > Geert
> > >
> > > --
> > > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
> > >
> > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> > > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> > > -- Linus Torvalds
> > >
>
>