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: <1606728979-44259-1-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com>
 <20201130112250.GK4077@smile.fi.intel.com> <63f7dcc4-a924-515a-2fea-31ec80f3353e@huawei.com>
 <20201205221522.ifjravnir5bzmjff@mobilestation>
In-Reply-To: <20201205221522.ifjravnir5bzmjff@mobilestation>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Sun, 6 Dec 2020 16:02:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CACRpkdawv2NUahn2gniH=29T6qqqFYSa53giC01PS1wq91+Ksg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] gpio: dwapb: mask/unmask IRQ when disable/enable it
To:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>
Cc:     luojiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 11:15 PM Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hmm, that sounds like a problem, but the explanation is a bit unclear
> to me. AFAICS you are saying that the only callbacks which are
> called during the IRQ request/release are the irq_enable(), right? If
> so then the only reason why we haven't got a problem reported due to
> that so far is that the IRQs actually unmasked by default.

What we usually do in cases like that (and I have discussed this
with tglx in the past I think) is to simply mask off all IRQs in probe().
Then they will be unmasked when requested by drivers.

See e.g. gpio-pl061 that has this line in probe():
writeb(0, pl061->base + GPIOIE); /* disable irqs */

Yours,
Linus Walleij