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: <1606901543-8957-1-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com>
 <1606901543-8957-2-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com> <CACRpkdbodato7AL4xv-oEO9+-Mo9fDaH+jZh+6T=3urE0tbULw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5955bd97-046c-8ac3-f66e-ea967e8f9128@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <5955bd97-046c-8ac3-f66e-ea967e8f9128@huawei.com>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:03:59 +0100
Message-ID: <CACRpkdZPmVWHV9Rbpfma3gDic=fmQQ9B0oQ0HsqwnJ0EpoGENA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] gpio: gpio-hisi: Add HiSilicon GPIO support
To:     luojiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.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

Hi Jiaxing,

thanks! waiting for the new patch!

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 9:19 AM luojiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com> wrote:

> >> +static void hisi_gpio_irq_disable(struct irq_data *d)
> >> +{
> >> +       struct gpio_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> >> +
> >> +       hisi_gpio_irq_set_mask(d);
> >> +       hisi_gpio_write_reg(chip, HISI_GPIO_INTEN_CLR_WX, BIT(irqd_to_hwirq(d)));
> >> +}
> >
> > Interesting with a GPIO hardware that both as enable and mask
> > bits. I can't see why, usually they just have masks but I suppose
> > there is some reason.
>
> I see gpio-dwapb.c distinguishes between enable and mask too.
>
> In my opinion, enable indicates that the user uses the GPIO line as the
> interrupt trigger source,
>
> and mask indicates that the user does not want to see an interrupts for
> a while.
>
> The difference between the two types of flag is that interrupts
> generated during masking are recorded but not lost,
>
> however, if interrupts are disabled, interrupts will lost.

Ah, that makes perfect sense! Thanks for explaining.

Yours,
Linus Walleij