lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 3/3] bus: sunxi-rsb: Clear interrupt status before each transfer
On 11/14/22 15:00, Jernej Škrabec wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
>
> Dne ponedeljek, 14. november 2022 ob 02:57:49 CET je Samuel Holland
> napisal(a):
>> Currently, the driver clears the interrupt status bits after anything
>> could have set them. However, this requires duplicating the same logic
>> in several places.
>>
>> Instead of clearing the status flags in the interrupt handler, disable
>> all further interrupts by clearing the RSB_CTRL_GLOBAL_INT_ENB bit.
>
> where is this bit cleared?

It is cleared by any write to RSB_CTRL that does not include it. I noted
it below with the "disable interrupts" comments.

>> Then we can delay the status register write until the start of the next
>> transfer, so it only has to be done in one place.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>> - Add a patch refactoring how the status bits are cleared
>>
>> drivers/bus/sunxi-rsb.c | 20 +++++---------------
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/bus/sunxi-rsb.c b/drivers/bus/sunxi-rsb.c
>> index 3aa91aed3bf7..cb622e60897b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/bus/sunxi-rsb.c
>> +++ b/drivers/bus/sunxi-rsb.c
>> @@ -279,6 +279,7 @@ static int _sunxi_rsb_run_xfer(struct sunxi_rsb *rsb)
>>
>> int_mask = RSB_INTS_LOAD_BSY | RSB_INTS_TRANS_ERR | RSB_INTS_TRANS_OVER;
>> writel(int_mask, rsb->regs + RSB_INTE);
>> + writel(int_mask, rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>
> Wouldn't be better to clear status before enabling interrupts? Unless global
> interrupt flag is cleared beforehand, but I don't see that anywhere.

Indeed the intention was that the global interrupt flag is cleared
beforehand, and only enabled on the next line below. However, I realize
I missed disabling it for the new atomic case.

I'm not so sure anymore that this patch is an improvement. What do you
think? I can send a v4 with a fix, or I am fine with skipping this
patch. I would at least like the other two to be merged for -fixes.

Regards,
Samuel

>> writel(RSB_CTRL_START_TRANS | RSB_CTRL_GLOBAL_INT_ENB,
>> rsb->regs + RSB_CTRL);
>>
>> @@ -286,7 +287,6 @@ static int _sunxi_rsb_run_xfer(struct sunxi_rsb *rsb)
>> timeout = readl_poll_timeout_atomic(rsb->regs + RSB_INTS,
>> status, (status & int_mask),
>> 10, 100000);
>> - writel(status, rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>> } else {
>> timeout = !wait_for_completion_io_timeout(&rsb-
>> complete,
>> msecs_to_jiffies(100));
>> @@ -296,12 +296,9 @@ static int _sunxi_rsb_run_xfer(struct sunxi_rsb *rsb)
>> if (timeout) {
>> dev_dbg(rsb->dev, "RSB timeout\n");
>>
>> - /* abort the transfer */
>> + /* abort the transfer and disable interrupts */
>> writel(RSB_CTRL_ABORT_TRANS, rsb->regs + RSB_CTRL);
>>
>> - /* clear any interrupt flags */
>> - writel(readl(rsb->regs + RSB_INTS), rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>> -
>> return -ETIMEDOUT;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -503,15 +500,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__devm_regmap_init_sunxi_rsb);
>> static irqreturn_t sunxi_rsb_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> {
>> struct sunxi_rsb *rsb = dev_id;
>> - u32 status;
>>
>> - status = readl(rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>> - rsb->status = status;
>> + /* disable interrupts */
>> + writel(0, rsb->regs + RSB_CTRL);
>>
>> - /* Clear interrupts */
>> - status &= (RSB_INTS_LOAD_BSY | RSB_INTS_TRANS_ERR |
>> - RSB_INTS_TRANS_OVER);
>> - writel(status, rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>> + rsb->status = readl(rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>>
>> complete(&rsb->complete);
>>
>> @@ -532,9 +525,6 @@ static int sunxi_rsb_init_device_mode(struct sunxi_rsb
>> *rsb) if (reg & RSB_DMCR_DEVICE_START)
>> ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
>>
>> - /* clear interrupt status bits */
>> - writel(readl(rsb->regs + RSB_INTS), rsb->regs + RSB_INTS);
>> -
>> return ret;
>> }

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-15 07:09    [W:0.067 / U:0.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site