From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ->ack_intr in m68k IDE drivers [was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ide: ->ide_dma_clear_irq() -> ->clear_irq()]
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 23:19:24 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A16FABC.3010906@ru.mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200905222044.42688.bzolnier@gmail.com>
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>>> It may also be worth considering turning this method into
>>>>test-and-clear, so that we can get the actual IDE interrupt state on
>>>>the chips that implement this...
>>> Probably might add the test_irq() method to be called on
>>>!hwif->waiting_for_dma. Cleraing the status at once seems impractical...
>> Yet this seems what ack_intr() method is doing already...
>> What it does is testing IRQ status and "acknowledging" it (the semantics
>>of "acknowledge" is not clear to me, yet it seems that it's clearing the
>>interrupt latch in the drivers where it's implemented). And the call site of
>>ack_intr() method corresponds to where test_irq() should have been called,
>>so it seems we don't need yet another method and probably didn't even need
>>clear_irq() method in the first place?..
> They have different goals -- the main purpose of ack_intr() (despite its name)
> seems to be testing whether the IRQ is ours,
It does clear some interrupt bit if it sees that IRQ is ours too, hence
the name.
> OTOH in clear_irq() we know that
> already and we just want to clear the pending IRQ status.
There seems to be duplication of functionality b/w ack_intr() and
clear_irq() now...
> So I'm not sure if unification is desirable... though some improvements are
> definitely possibly there (less confusing naming at least)...
>> Bart, could you clarify about how ack_intr() is supposed to work?
> Good question, m68k list would be the best place to look for an answer..
Well, I seem to have been able to infer it from the code...
MBR, Sergei
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ->ack_intr in m68k IDE drivers [was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ide: ->ide_dma_clear_irq() -> ->clear_irq()]
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 23:19:24 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A16FABC.3010906@ru.mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200905222044.42688.bzolnier@gmail.com>
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>>> It may also be worth considering turning this method into
>>>>test-and-clear, so that we can get the actual IDE interrupt state on
>>>>the chips that implement this...
>>> Probably might add the test_irq() method to be called on
>>>!hwif->waiting_for_dma. Cleraing the status at once seems impractical...
>> Yet this seems what ack_intr() method is doing already...
>> What it does is testing IRQ status and "acknowledging" it (the semantics
>>of "acknowledge" is not clear to me, yet it seems that it's clearing the
>>interrupt latch in the drivers where it's implemented). And the call site of
>>ack_intr() method corresponds to where test_irq() should have been called,
>>so it seems we don't need yet another method and probably didn't even need
>>clear_irq() method in the first place?..
> They have different goals -- the main purpose of ack_intr() (despite its name)
> seems to be testing whether the IRQ is ours,
It does clear some interrupt bit if it sees that IRQ is ours too, hence
the name.
> OTOH in clear_irq() we know that
> already and we just want to clear the pending IRQ status.
There seems to be duplication of functionality b/w ack_intr() and
clear_irq() now...
> So I'm not sure if unification is desirable... though some improvements are
> definitely possibly there (less confusing naming at least)...
>> Bart, could you clarify about how ack_intr() is supposed to work?
> Good question, m68k list would be the best place to look for an answer..
Well, I seem to have been able to infer it from the code...
MBR, Sergei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-22 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-19 18:31 [PATCH 2/5] ide: ->ide_dma_clear_irq() -> ->clear_irq() Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-08-19 22:22 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2008-09-15 22:11 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2008-09-15 22:29 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-09-16 9:16 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2008-11-12 2:01 ` Jeremy Higdon
2009-05-21 14:07 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2009-05-22 18:44 ` ->ack_intr in m68k IDE drivers [was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ide: ->ide_dma_clear_irq() -> ->clear_irq()] Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-05-22 18:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-05-22 18:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-05-22 19:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2009-05-22 19:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2009-05-22 19:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2009-05-22 19:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov [this message]
2009-05-22 19:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A16FABC.3010906@ru.mvista.com \
--to=sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com \
--cc=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.