diff mbox series

[v4] Fix freeze in lm8333 i2c keyboard driver

Message ID 20230428102015.810686-1-tomas.mudrunka@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Headers show
Series [v4] Fix freeze in lm8333 i2c keyboard driver | expand

Commit Message

Tomas Mudrunka April 28, 2023, 10:20 a.m. UTC
LM8333 uses gpio interrupt line which is triggered by falling edge.
When button is pressed before driver is loaded,
driver will miss the edge and never respond again.
To fix this we run the interrupt handler after registering IRQ
to clear the interrupt via i2c command.

Signed-off-by: Tomas Mudrunka <tomas.mudrunka@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Comments

Jeff LaBundy May 3, 2023, 3:02 a.m. UTC | #1
Hi Tomas,

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 12:20:15PM +0200, Tomas Mudrunka wrote:
> LM8333 uses gpio interrupt line which is triggered by falling edge.
> When button is pressed before driver is loaded,
> driver will miss the edge and never respond again.
> To fix this we run the interrupt handler after registering IRQ
> to clear the interrupt via i2c command.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomas Mudrunka <tomas.mudrunka@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c
> index 7457c3220..9a810ca00 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c
> @@ -184,6 +184,8 @@ static int lm8333_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>  	if (err)
>  		goto free_mem;
>  
> +	lm8333_irq_thread(client->irq, lm8333);

Just to clarify, my stance is that this call should go _before_ the handler
is registered. Your earlier statement that doing so would steal any pending
status from the handler is correct; however, it is a moot point because the
handler cannot do anything with that status until the input device has been
registered anyway.

Any events that come before then are off the table, and this is OK because
user space isn't going to start consuming key events until well after this
driver has probed anyway.

The reason behind my assertion is that as a matter of best practice, you
should not have two asynchronous threads that can in theory access the same
register. You are correct that the handler would simply return IRQ_NONE in
such a race, but it sets a bad precedent and opens room for bugs in case
this driver is modified in the future. It also creates one unnecessary I2C
read.

This is why it is much more common to register the handler _after_ manually
accessing read-to-clear registers; the register access remains synchronous.
In case you feel I have misunderstood, please let me know.

> +
>  	err = input_register_device(input);
>  	if (err)
>  		goto free_irq;
> -- 
> 2.40.0

Kind regards,
Jeff LaBundy
Tomas Mudrunka May 3, 2023, 8:54 a.m. UTC | #2
> Just to clarify, my stance is that this call should go _before_ the handler
> is registered.

Ok, i will fix the patch later today.

> Any events that come before then are off the table, and this is OK because
> user space isn't going to start consuming key events until well after this
> driver has probed anyway.

Well, that was never my point. I don't care about capturing events
that happen before driver was properly loaded.
My only concern was to limit possibility of deadlock which happened previously.
Because that makes device unusable till the IC is power cycled.
Which might be especially annoying on devices that have power button
implemented using this exact IC :-)

> The reason behind my assertion is that as a matter of best practice, you
> should not have two asynchronous threads that can in theory access the same
> register.

Yeah, this makes bit more sense now. Didn't realized IRQ might
interrupt that lm8333_irq_thread() call immediately.
While not very likely to cause problems like deadlock of the driver, i
think it's a valid point.

After all this is what happens with IRQF_ONESHOT anyway right? Each
time the IRQ is triggered it's disabled, lm8333_irq_thread() is run
and then it's enabled immediately after that. So i guess the behaviour
on each keypress is very similar to calling lm8333_irq_thread() before
registering the IRQ handler, which gives me some confidence there
might not be huge chance for deadlock under normal circumstances.

Though i wonder what would happen if some EMI burst would create rapid
train of randomly timed keypresses, that might just hit the
unfortunate sweetspot after while... Might test that later in the lab,
since i really need the software to remain operational after such
condition had passed.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c
index 7457c3220..9a810ca00 100644
--- a/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c
+++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/lm8333.c
@@ -184,6 +184,8 @@  static int lm8333_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
 	if (err)
 		goto free_mem;
 
+	lm8333_irq_thread(client->irq, lm8333);
+
 	err = input_register_device(input);
 	if (err)
 		goto free_irq;