2024-01-30 07:38:10

by Arturas Moskvinas

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: mcp23s08: Check only GPIOs which have interrupts enabled

GPINTEN register contains information about GPIOs with enabled
interrupts no need to check other GPIOs for changes.

Signed-off-by: Arturas Moskvinas <[email protected]>
---
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-mcp23s08.c | 14 ++++++++++----
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-mcp23s08.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-mcp23s08.c
index 4551575e4e7d..bfa933284e84 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-mcp23s08.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-mcp23s08.c
@@ -375,7 +375,8 @@ mcp23s08_direction_output(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset, int value)
static irqreturn_t mcp23s08_irq(int irq, void *data)
{
struct mcp23s08 *mcp = data;
- int intcap, intcon, intf, i, gpio, gpio_orig, intcap_mask, defval;
+ int intcap, intcon, intf, i, gpio, gpio_orig, intcap_mask, defval, gpinten;
+ unsigned long int enabled_interrupts;
unsigned int child_irq;
bool intf_set, intcap_changed, gpio_bit_changed,
defval_changed, gpio_set;
@@ -395,6 +396,10 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp23s08_irq(int irq, void *data)
if (mcp_read(mcp, MCP_INTCON, &intcon))
goto unlock;

+ if (mcp_read(mcp, MCP_GPINTEN, &gpinten))
+ goto unlock;
+ enabled_interrupts = gpinten;
+
if (mcp_read(mcp, MCP_DEFVAL, &defval))
goto unlock;

@@ -410,9 +415,10 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp23s08_irq(int irq, void *data)
"intcap 0x%04X intf 0x%04X gpio_orig 0x%04X gpio 0x%04X\n",
intcap, intf, gpio_orig, gpio);

- for (i = 0; i < mcp->chip.ngpio; i++) {
- /* We must check all of the inputs on the chip,
- * otherwise we may not notice a change on >=2 pins.
+ for_each_set_bit(i, &enabled_interrupts, mcp->chip.ngpio) {
+ /* We must check all of the inputs with enabled interrupts
+ * on the chip, otherwise we may not notice a change
+ * on >=2 pins.
*
* On at least the mcp23s17, INTCAP is only updated
* one byte at a time(INTCAPA and INTCAPB are

base-commit: 41bccc98fb7931d63d03f326a746ac4d429c1dd3
--
2.43.0



2024-01-31 09:59:34

by Linus Walleij

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: mcp23s08: Check only GPIOs which have interrupts enabled

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 8:37 AM Arturas Moskvinas
<[email protected]> wrote:

> GPINTEN register contains information about GPIOs with enabled
> interrupts no need to check other GPIOs for changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arturas Moskvinas <[email protected]>

This driver has a lot of users, so adding some reviewers.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-gpio/[email protected]/

Yours,
Linus Walleij

2024-02-01 12:04:19

by Andy Shevchenko

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: mcp23s08: Check only GPIOs which have interrupts enabled

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:37:10AM +0200, Arturas Moskvinas wrote:
> GPINTEN register contains information about GPIOs with enabled
> interrupts no need to check other GPIOs for changes.

..

> + if (mcp_read(mcp, MCP_GPINTEN, &gpinten))
> + goto unlock;

> + enabled_interrupts = gpinten;

Move this line to be...

..

> - for (i = 0; i < mcp->chip.ngpio; i++) {
> - /* We must check all of the inputs on the chip,
> - * otherwise we may not notice a change on >=2 pins.

..just here (w/o any blank line in between).

> + for_each_set_bit(i, &enabled_interrupts, mcp->chip.ngpio) {

..

> + /* We must check all of the inputs with enabled interrupts
> + * on the chip, otherwise we may not notice a change
> + * on >=2 pins.

Missing space after =. But better to spell in proper English, i.e.
"...great than or equal to 2 pins."

> *
> * On at least the mcp23s17, INTCAP is only updated

/*
* Use proper multi-line
* comment style as depicted
* in this example.
*/

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko



2024-02-01 13:35:56

by Andy Shevchenko

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: mcp23s08: Check only GPIOs which have interrupts enabled

On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 02:19:38PM +0200, Arturas Moskvinas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 2:03 PM Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> wrote:

..

> > > + /* We must check all of the inputs with enabled interrupts
> > > + * on the chip, otherwise we may not notice a change
> > > + * on >=2 pins.
> >
> > Missing space after =. But better to spell in proper English, i.e.
> > "...great than or equal to 2 pins."
> >
> + /*
> + * We must check all of the inputs with enabled interrupts
> + * on the chip, otherwise we may not notice a change
> + * on more than one pin.
>
> Does this sound better?

LGTM, thanks.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko