i2c: aspeed: Adjust spinlock scope in the irq handler

Message ID 20180702214011.16071-1-jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com
State Accepted
Headers show
Series
  • i2c: aspeed: Adjust spinlock scope in the irq handler
Related show

Commit Message

Jae Hyun Yoo July 2, 2018, 9:40 p.m.
This patch adjusts spinlock scope to make it wrap the whole irq
handler using a single lock/unlock which covers both master and
slave handlers.

Signed-off-by: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c | 16 ++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Comments

Brendan Higgins July 12, 2018, 8:41 a.m. | #1
On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 2:40 PM Jae Hyun Yoo
<jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> This patch adjusts spinlock scope to make it wrap the whole irq
> handler using a single lock/unlock which covers both master and
> slave handlers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c | 16 ++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> index 60e4d0e939a3..9f02aa959a3e 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> @@ -234,7 +234,6 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>         bool irq_handled = true;
>         u8 value;
>
> -       spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>         if (!slave) {
>                 irq_handled = false;
>                 goto out;
> @@ -325,7 +324,6 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>         writel(status_ack, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>
>  out:
> -       spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
>         return irq_handled;
>  }
>  #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
> @@ -389,7 +387,6 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>         u8 recv_byte;
>         int ret;
>
> -       spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>         irq_status = readl(bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>         /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
>         writel(irq_status, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
> @@ -547,22 +544,29 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>                 dev_err(bus->dev,
>                         "irq handled != irq. expected 0x%08x, but was 0x%08x\n",
>                         irq_status, status_ack);
> -       spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
>         return !!irq_status;
>  }
>
>  static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  {
>         struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus = dev_id;
> +       bool ret;
> +
> +       spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>
>  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
>         if (aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(bus)) {
>                 dev_dbg(bus->dev, "irq handled by slave.\n");
> -               return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +               ret = true;
> +               goto out;
>         }
>  #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
>
> -       return aspeed_i2c_master_irq(bus) ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
> +       ret = aspeed_i2c_master_irq(bus);
> +
> +out:
> +       spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
> +       return ret ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>  }
>
>  static int aspeed_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> --
> 2.17.1
>

Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>

Thanks!
Jae Hyun Yoo July 13, 2018, 7:21 p.m. | #2
On 7/12/2018 1:41 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 2:40 PM Jae Hyun Yoo
> <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> This patch adjusts spinlock scope to make it wrap the whole irq
>> handler using a single lock/unlock which covers both master and
>> slave handlers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c | 16 ++++++++++------
>>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
>> index 60e4d0e939a3..9f02aa959a3e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
>> @@ -234,7 +234,6 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>>          bool irq_handled = true;
>>          u8 value;
>>
>> -       spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>>          if (!slave) {
>>                  irq_handled = false;
>>                  goto out;
>> @@ -325,7 +324,6 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>>          writel(status_ack, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>>
>>   out:
>> -       spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
>>          return irq_handled;
>>   }
>>   #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
>> @@ -389,7 +387,6 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>>          u8 recv_byte;
>>          int ret;
>>
>> -       spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>>          irq_status = readl(bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>>          /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
>>          writel(irq_status, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>> @@ -547,22 +544,29 @@ static bool aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
>>                  dev_err(bus->dev,
>>                          "irq handled != irq. expected 0x%08x, but was 0x%08x\n",
>>                          irq_status, status_ack);
>> -       spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
>>          return !!irq_status;
>>   }
>>
>>   static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>   {
>>          struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus = dev_id;
>> +       bool ret;
>> +
>> +       spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>>
>>   #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
>>          if (aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(bus)) {
>>                  dev_dbg(bus->dev, "irq handled by slave.\n");
>> -               return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> +               ret = true;
>> +               goto out;
>>          }
>>   #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
>>
>> -       return aspeed_i2c_master_irq(bus) ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>> +       ret = aspeed_i2c_master_irq(bus);
>> +
>> +out:
>> +       spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
>> +       return ret ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
>>   }
>>
>>   static int aspeed_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
> 
> Thanks!
> 

Thanks Brendan!

BTW, to whom should I ask applying this patch? Should I send v2 after
adding your reviewed-by tag?

Thanks,

Jae
Wolfram Sang July 13, 2018, 8:33 p.m. | #3
> BTW, to whom should I ask applying this patch? Should I send v2 after
> adding your reviewed-by tag?

Not needed, thanks. I use 'patchwork' and this tool collects all the
tags for me. If I see a patch reviewed by a driver maintainer, I'll pick
it up in the next queue.
Jae Hyun Yoo July 13, 2018, 8:37 p.m. | #4
On 7/13/2018 1:33 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
>> BTW, to whom should I ask applying this patch? Should I send v2 after
>> adding your reviewed-by tag?
> 
> Not needed, thanks. I use 'patchwork' and this tool collects all the
> tags for me. If I see a patch reviewed by a driver maintainer, I'll pick
> it up in the next queue.
> 

Oh, I see. Thanks a lot Wolfram!
Wolfram Sang July 20, 2018, 10:29 p.m. | #5
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 02:40:11PM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
> This patch adjusts spinlock scope to make it wrap the whole irq
> handler using a single lock/unlock which covers both master and
> slave handlers.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com>

Applied to for-next, thanks!

Not related to these patches, but there is an issue found with sparse:

drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c:875:38: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different modifiers)
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c:875:38:    expected unsigned int ( *get_clk_reg_val )( ... )
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c:875:38:    got void const *const data

Maybe someone wants to have a go at this...

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
index 60e4d0e939a3..9f02aa959a3e 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
@@ -234,7 +234,6 @@  static bool aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
 	bool irq_handled = true;
 	u8 value;
 
-	spin_lock(&bus->lock);
 	if (!slave) {
 		irq_handled = false;
 		goto out;
@@ -325,7 +324,6 @@  static bool aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
 	writel(status_ack, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
 
 out:
-	spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
 	return irq_handled;
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
@@ -389,7 +387,6 @@  static bool aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
 	u8 recv_byte;
 	int ret;
 
-	spin_lock(&bus->lock);
 	irq_status = readl(bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
 	/* Ack all interrupt bits. */
 	writel(irq_status, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
@@ -547,22 +544,29 @@  static bool aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus)
 		dev_err(bus->dev,
 			"irq handled != irq. expected 0x%08x, but was 0x%08x\n",
 			irq_status, status_ack);
-	spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
 	return !!irq_status;
 }
 
 static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
 {
 	struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus = dev_id;
+	bool ret;
+
+	spin_lock(&bus->lock);
 
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
 	if (aspeed_i2c_slave_irq(bus)) {
 		dev_dbg(bus->dev, "irq handled by slave.\n");
-		return IRQ_HANDLED;
+		ret = true;
+		goto out;
 	}
 #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
 
-	return aspeed_i2c_master_irq(bus) ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
+	ret = aspeed_i2c_master_irq(bus);
+
+out:
+	spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
+	return ret ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
 }
 
 static int aspeed_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap,