On 11/7/22 15:48, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
> From: Yassine Oudjana <[email protected]>
>
> Commit bf7571c00dca ("extcon: usbc-tusb320: Add USB TYPE-C support")
> added an optional Type-C interface to the driver but missed to check
> if it is in use when calling the IRQ handler. This causes an oops on
> devices currently using the old extcon interface. Check if a Type-C
> port is registered before calling the Type-C IRQ handler.
>
> Fixes: bf7571c00dca ("extcon: usbc-tusb320: Add USB TYPE-C support")
> Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c | 9 ++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
> index 41041ff0fadb..037bc11b2a48 100644
> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
> @@ -327,7 +327,14 @@ static irqreturn_t tusb320_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> return IRQ_NONE;
>
> tusb320_extcon_irq_handler(priv, reg);
> - tusb320_typec_irq_handler(priv, reg);
> +
> + /*
> + * Type-C support is optional for backward compatibility.
It's the other way around, extcon is the legacy, type-c is the new, right ?
> + * Only call the Type-C handler if a port had been registered
> + * previously.
> + */
> + if (priv->port)
> + tusb320_typec_irq_handler(priv, reg);
>
> regmap_write(priv->regmap, TUSB320_REG9, reg);
Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Thanks!
On Mon, Nov 7 2022 at 15:51:55 +01:00:00, Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On 11/7/22 15:48, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
>> From: Yassine Oudjana <[email protected]>
>>
>> Commit bf7571c00dca ("extcon: usbc-tusb320: Add USB TYPE-C support")
>> added an optional Type-C interface to the driver but missed to check
>> if it is in use when calling the IRQ handler. This causes an oops on
>> devices currently using the old extcon interface. Check if a Type-C
>> port is registered before calling the Type-C IRQ handler.
>>
>> Fixes: bf7571c00dca ("extcon: usbc-tusb320: Add USB TYPE-C support")
>> Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c | 9 ++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>> b/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>> index 41041ff0fadb..037bc11b2a48 100644
>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>> @@ -327,7 +327,14 @@ static irqreturn_t tusb320_irq_handler(int irq,
>> void *dev_id)
>> return IRQ_NONE;
>> tusb320_extcon_irq_handler(priv, reg);
>> - tusb320_typec_irq_handler(priv, reg);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Type-C support is optional for backward compatibility.
>
> It's the other way around, extcon is the legacy, type-c is the new,
> right ?
Type-C is the new one, yes. This comment is somewhat similar to the one
in tusb320_typec_probe():
/* The Type-C connector is optional, for backward compatibility. */
Perhaps a better way to say this in both comments would be "to
maintain" instead of "for".
>
>> + * Only call the Type-C handler if a port had been registered
>> + * previously.
>> + */
>> + if (priv->port)
>> + tusb320_typec_irq_handler(priv, reg);
>> regmap_write(priv->regmap, TUSB320_REG9, reg);
>
> Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
>
> Thanks!
Thanks for the quick review!
Yassine
On 11/7/22 16:02, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 7 2022 at 15:51:55 +01:00:00, Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> On 11/7/22 15:48, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
>>> From: Yassine Oudjana <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Commit bf7571c00dca ("extcon: usbc-tusb320: Add USB TYPE-C support")
>>> added an optional Type-C interface to the driver but missed to check
>>> if it is in use when calling the IRQ handler. This causes an oops on
>>> devices currently using the old extcon interface. Check if a Type-C
>>> port is registered before calling the Type-C IRQ handler.
>>>
>>> Fixes: bf7571c00dca ("extcon: usbc-tusb320: Add USB TYPE-C support")
>>> Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c | 9 ++++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>>> b/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>>> index 41041ff0fadb..037bc11b2a48 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-usbc-tusb320.c
>>> @@ -327,7 +327,14 @@ static irqreturn_t tusb320_irq_handler(int irq,
>>> void *dev_id)
>>> return IRQ_NONE;
>>> tusb320_extcon_irq_handler(priv, reg);
>>> - tusb320_typec_irq_handler(priv, reg);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Type-C support is optional for backward compatibility.
>>
>> It's the other way around, extcon is the legacy, type-c is the new,
>> right ?
>
> Type-C is the new one, yes. This comment is somewhat similar to the one
> in tusb320_typec_probe():
>
> /* The Type-C connector is optional, for backward compatibility. */
Ahhh, The Type-C connector support is indeed optional to avoid breaking
any of the older systems which only use/provide extcon.
> Perhaps a better way to say this in both comments would be "to maintain"
> instead of "for".
I think best just drop the "for backward compatibility" altogether, like so:
/*
* Type-C support is optional. Only call the Type-C handler if a
* port had been registered previously.
*/