Re: [PATCH 09/12] irqchip: cirrus: Add driver for Cirrus Logic CS48L31/32/33 codecs

[Richard Fitzgerald]

On 10/11/2022 12:01, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 11:22:26 +0000,
> Richard Fitzgerald <rf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 10/11/2022 08:02, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > On Wed, 09 Nov 2022 16:53:28 +0000,
> > > Richard Fitzgerald <rf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > The Cirrus Logic CS48L31/32/33 audio codecs contain a programmable
> > > > interrupt controller with a variety of interrupt sources, including
> > > > GPIOs that can be used as interrupt inputs.
> > > >
> > > > This driver provides the handling for the interrupt controller. As the
> > > > codec is accessed via regmap, the generic regmap_irq functionality
> > > > is used to do most of the work.
> > >
> > > I cannot spot a shred of interrupt controller code in there. This
> >
> > It is providing support for handling an interrupt controller so that
> > other drivers can bind to those interrupts. It's just that regmap
> > provides a lot of generic implementation for SPI-connected interrupt
> > controllers so we don't need to open-code all that in the
> > irqchip driver.
>
> And thus none of that code needs to live in drivers/irqchip.
>
> > > belongs IMO to the MFD code.
> >
> > We did once put interrupt support in MFD for an older product line but
> > the MFD maintainer doesn't like the MFD being a dumping-ground for
> > random other functionality that have their own subsystems.
>
> I don't like this stuff either. All this code is a glorified set of
> interrupt handlers and #defines that only hide the lack of a proper DT
> binding to express the interrupt routing (it feels like looking at
> board files from 10 years ago).

I didn't understand this. The whole purpose of this is to instantiate
Linux interrupts for the PIC interrupt sources so that other drivers
that want to use the interrupts from the CS48L32 PIC can use standard
kernel APIs or DT to bind against them.

The four handlers registered within the driver are done here simply
because they don't belong to any particular child driver. Since they
are a fixed feature of the chip that we know we want to handle we may as
well just register them.
If we put them in the MFD with DT definitions it would make a
circular dependency between MFD and its child, which is not a great
situation. If it's these handlers that are bothering you, we could move
them to the audio driver.

> None of that belongs in the irqchip code.

I don't really understand here what the criteria is that makes this not
a irqchip driver but it was ok for madera. We have a PIC and we need to
handle that and export those interrupts so other drivers can bind
against them. Is the problem that the PIC is on a SPI bus and irqchip is
only for memory-mapped PICs? Or is it that we have re-used existing
library code instead of open-coding it, so you aren't seeing the actual
handling code?

As Lee has already objected in the past to having the interrupt
controller implementation in MFD I don't want to move it there without
Lee's agreement that it's ok to put the PIC IRQ implementation in MFD
for CS48L32.

> > >   It is also a direct copy of the existing
> > > irq-madera.c code, duplicated for no obvious reason.
> >
> > It's not a duplicate. The register map of this device is different
> > (different addressing, 32-bit registers not 16-bit)
>
> And? How hard is it to implement an indirection containing the
> register map and the relevant callbacks? /roll-eyes
>
> 	M.