diff mbox series

[v2,1/2] gpiolib: acpi: Add support to ignore programming an interrupt

Message ID 20220803042501.515-1-mario.limonciello@amd.com
State Accepted
Commit 6b6af7bd5718f4e45a9b930533aec1158387d552
Headers show
Series [v2,1/2] gpiolib: acpi: Add support to ignore programming an interrupt | expand

Commit Message

Mario Limonciello Aug. 3, 2022, 4:24 a.m. UTC
gpiolib-acpi already had support for ignoring a pin for wakeup, but
if an OEM configures a floating pin as an interrupt source then
stopping it from being a wakeup won't do much good to stop the
interrupt storm.

Add support for a module parameter and quirk infrastructure to
ignore interrupts as well.

Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
---
v1->v2:
 * Drop enum
 * Drop Tested-by tag

 drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Comments

Mika Westerberg Aug. 3, 2022, 9:50 a.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 11:25:00PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> Asus UM325UAZ has GPIO 18 programmed as both an interrupt and a wake
> source, but confirmed with internal team on this design this pin is
> floating and shouldn't have been programmed. This causes lots of
> spurious IRQs on the system and horrendous battery life.
> 
> Add a quirk to ignore attempts to program this pin on this system.
> 
> Reported-by: Pavel Krc <reg.krn@pkrc.net>
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216208
> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>

Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Andy Shevchenko Aug. 26, 2022, 5:31 p.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 05:07:15PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 8/3/22 06:24, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > gpiolib-acpi already had support for ignoring a pin for wakeup, but
> > if an OEM configures a floating pin as an interrupt source then
> > stopping it from being a wakeup won't do much good to stop the
> > interrupt storm.
> > 
> > Add support for a module parameter and quirk infrastructure to
> > ignore interrupts as well.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
> 
> Thanks, patch looks good to me:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>

Pushed to my review and testing queue, thanks!
Mario Limonciello Aug. 29, 2022, 6:16 p.m. UTC | #3
[Public]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 12:32
> To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> Cc: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>; Mika Westerberg
> <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>; Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>;
> Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>; linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> acpi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] gpiolib: acpi: Add support to ignore programming
> an interrupt
> 
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 05:07:15PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > On 8/3/22 06:24, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > gpiolib-acpi already had support for ignoring a pin for wakeup, but
> > > if an OEM configures a floating pin as an interrupt source then
> > > stopping it from being a wakeup won't do much good to stop the
> > > interrupt storm.
> > >
> > > Add support for a module parameter and quirk infrastructure to
> > > ignore interrupts as well.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
> >
> > Thanks, patch looks good to me:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> 
> Pushed to my review and testing queue, thanks!
> 
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
> 

Andy,

Just to double check, you meant you took both patches, not just the first right?
Andy Shevchenko Aug. 29, 2022, 7:26 p.m. UTC | #4
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 06:16:45PM +0000, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> > From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 12:32
> > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 05:07:15PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > On 8/3/22 06:24, Mario Limonciello wrote:

...

> > > Thanks, patch looks good to me:
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Pushed to my review and testing queue, thanks!

> Just to double check, you meant you took both patches, not just the first right?

Yes, I took 2 patches. To reduce a confusion I highly recommend to send a
series with a cover letter, so the answer to it will definitely be equal to
"yes, I have took all of them" if nothing else specified.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
index c2523ac26fac..f993f6f728ad 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
@@ -32,9 +32,16 @@  MODULE_PARM_DESC(ignore_wake,
 		 "controller@pin combos on which to ignore the ACPI wake flag "
 		 "ignore_wake=controller@pin[,controller@pin[,...]]");
 
+static char *ignore_interrupt;
+module_param(ignore_interrupt, charp, 0444);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(ignore_interrupt,
+		 "controller@pin combos on which to ignore interrupt "
+		 "ignore_interrupt=controller@pin[,controller@pin[,...]]");
+
 struct acpi_gpiolib_dmi_quirk {
 	bool no_edge_events_on_boot;
 	char *ignore_wake;
+	char *ignore_interrupt;
 };
 
 /**
@@ -317,14 +324,15 @@  static struct gpio_desc *acpi_request_own_gpiod(struct gpio_chip *chip,
 	return desc;
 }
 
-static bool acpi_gpio_in_ignore_list(const char *controller_in, unsigned int pin_in)
+static bool acpi_gpio_in_ignore_list(const char *ignore_list, const char *controller_in,
+				     unsigned int pin_in)
 {
 	const char *controller, *pin_str;
 	unsigned int pin;
 	char *endp;
 	int len;
 
-	controller = ignore_wake;
+	controller = ignore_list;
 	while (controller) {
 		pin_str = strchr(controller, '@');
 		if (!pin_str)
@@ -348,7 +356,7 @@  static bool acpi_gpio_in_ignore_list(const char *controller_in, unsigned int pin
 
 	return false;
 err:
-	pr_err_once("Error: Invalid value for gpiolib_acpi.ignore_wake: %s\n", ignore_wake);
+	pr_err_once("Error: Invalid value for gpiolib_acpi.ignore_...: %s\n", ignore_list);
 	return false;
 }
 
@@ -360,7 +368,7 @@  static bool acpi_gpio_irq_is_wake(struct device *parent,
 	if (agpio->wake_capable != ACPI_WAKE_CAPABLE)
 		return false;
 
-	if (acpi_gpio_in_ignore_list(dev_name(parent), pin)) {
+	if (acpi_gpio_in_ignore_list(ignore_wake, dev_name(parent), pin)) {
 		dev_info(parent, "Ignoring wakeup on pin %u\n", pin);
 		return false;
 	}
@@ -427,6 +435,11 @@  static acpi_status acpi_gpiochip_alloc_event(struct acpi_resource *ares,
 		goto fail_unlock_irq;
 	}
 
+	if (acpi_gpio_in_ignore_list(ignore_interrupt, dev_name(chip->parent), pin)) {
+		dev_info(chip->parent, "Ignoring interrupt on pin %u\n", pin);
+		return AE_OK;
+	}
+
 	event = kzalloc(sizeof(*event), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!event)
 		goto fail_unlock_irq;
@@ -1582,6 +1595,9 @@  static int __init acpi_gpio_setup_params(void)
 	if (ignore_wake == NULL && quirk && quirk->ignore_wake)
 		ignore_wake = quirk->ignore_wake;
 
+	if (ignore_interrupt == NULL && quirk && quirk->ignore_interrupt)
+		ignore_interrupt = quirk->ignore_interrupt;
+
 	return 0;
 }