Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200419001858.105281-1-hector.bujanda@digi.com>
 <CAMRc=MeHun_WEApEXP59ZszGa2n+wbU9qq3wU1VO9o590rO-Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACRpkdaeXFW5K=Npy2ubWsffc7aepEQ5kSJ2HrkrESjaTy_psQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200525022252.GA22956@sol> <CACRpkdagkhbULGVGJqcS55m=X2EaH_iK0Khr8+6M7ATWrC3hOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200525151736.GA32461@sol>
In-Reply-To: <20200525151736.GA32461@sol>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 May 2020 07:31:20 +0200
Message-ID: <CACRpkdZnLv=mv6JEHx0aF8YsUbpJH_ZrtCD+T23XfqvJLxw4Xg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: add GPIO_SET_DEBOUNCE_IOCTL
To:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Hector Bujanda <hector.bujanda@digi.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 5:17 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I suppose gpiolib would have to steal or intercept the interrupt
> > by using e.g. IRQF_SHARED and then just return IRQ_HANDLED
> > on the first IRQ so the underlying irq handler does not get called.
>
> And how would gpiolib ensure that it was first in the chain?

I don't know.

> Totally agree with the concept - just trying to work out how to
> implement it seemlessly given the existing API and usage, and given my
> limited knowledge of the kernel internals.

The irqchip maintainers certainly know the answer for the question
of shared interrupts at least.

> > Failure is an option! Sorry if I push too complex ideas.
>
> I'm not as concerned about complexity as I am about fragility.
>
> I don't see any problem adding debounce for gpiolib-cdev.
> Adding a more complete solution to gpiolib itself is certainly
> non-trivial, if it is possible at all.

I agree. It's just that I perceive it as more elegant if we can do that.

> The path I'll probably be taking is adding a debouncer to gpiolib-cdev,
> so at least we have a solution for userspace, then take a longer look at
> the more general solution.

That's fine! Thanks for looking into this.

Linus Walleij