drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT is passed to hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic(), whose
timeout argument is in milliseconds, not microseconds:
atomic_delay += HWSPINLOCK_RETRY_DELAY_US;
if (atomic_delay > to * 1000)
return -ETIMEDOUT;
So stm32mp_exti_set_type() asks for a 1 second timeout where the comment
next to the macro says it wants 1 millisecond. The semaphore is polled
with udelay() from a section that holds chip_data->rlock, a
raw_spinlock_t, so preemption stays disabled for the whole wait on every
configuration, PREEMPT_RT included.
The hwspinlock core documents this explicitly:
If the mode is HWLOCK_IN_ATOMIC (called from an atomic context) the
timeout is handled with busy-waiting delays, hence shall not exceed
few msecs.
Fixes: 5257169ade8c ("irqchip/stm32-exti: Use the hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic() API")
Reviewed-by: Radu Rendec <radu@rendec.net>
Signed-off-by: Ju Nan <junan76@163.com>
---
changelog:
v3: redefine the timeout macro with time unit on it
v2: add "Fixes" tag suggested by Radu Rendec
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260805032139.35420-2-junan76@163.com/
---
drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c
index a24f4f1a4..ce4e03ee1 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
#define IRQS_PER_BANK 32
-#define HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT 1000 /* usec */
+#define HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT_MS 1
#define EXTI_EnCIDCFGR(n) (0x180 + (n) * 4)
#define EXTI_HWCFGR1 0x3f0
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ static int stm32mp_exti_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
raw_spin_lock(&chip_data->rlock);
if (hwlock) {
- err = hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic(hwlock, HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT);
+ err = hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic(hwlock, HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT_MS);
if (err) {
pr_err("%s can't get hwspinlock (%d)\n", __func__, err);
goto unlock;
--
2.55.0
On Fri, 2026-08-21 at 10:47 +0800, Ju Nan wrote:
> HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT is passed to hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic(), whose
> timeout argument is in milliseconds, not microseconds:
>
> atomic_delay += HWSPINLOCK_RETRY_DELAY_US;
> if (atomic_delay > to * 1000)
> return -ETIMEDOUT;
>
> So stm32mp_exti_set_type() asks for a 1 second timeout where the comment
> next to the macro says it wants 1 millisecond. The semaphore is polled
> with udelay() from a section that holds chip_data->rlock, a
> raw_spinlock_t, so preemption stays disabled for the whole wait on every
> configuration, PREEMPT_RT included.
>
> The hwspinlock core documents this explicitly:
>
> If the mode is HWLOCK_IN_ATOMIC (called from an atomic context) the
> timeout is handled with busy-waiting delays, hence shall not exceed
> few msecs.
>
> Fixes: 5257169ade8c ("irqchip/stm32-exti: Use the hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic() API")
> Reviewed-by: Radu Rendec <radu@rendec.net>
> Signed-off-by: Ju Nan <junan76@163.com>
> ---
> changelog:
>
> v3: redefine the timeout macro with time unit on it
> v2: add "Fixes" tag suggested by Radu Rendec
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260805032139.35420-2-junan76@163.com/
> ---
> drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c
> index a24f4f1a4..ce4e03ee1 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32mp-exti.c
> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
>
> #define IRQS_PER_BANK 32
>
> -#define HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT 1000 /* usec */
> +#define HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT_MS 1
>
> #define EXTI_EnCIDCFGR(n) (0x180 + (n) * 4)
> #define EXTI_HWCFGR1 0x3f0
> @@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ static int stm32mp_exti_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
> raw_spin_lock(&chip_data->rlock);
>
> if (hwlock) {
> - err = hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic(hwlock, HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT);
> + err = hwspin_lock_timeout_in_atomic(hwlock, HWSPNLCK_TIMEOUT_MS);
> if (err) {
> pr_err("%s can't get hwspinlock (%d)\n", __func__, err);
> goto unlock;
Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.