From: eric.y.miao@gmail.com (Eric Miao)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 05/25] pxa3xx_nand: rework irq logic
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:02:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinzmIud44FuZhZSs94yo16F0ipP-uPdX9gAhdPf@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikmuCHqJQY2g8G3FsrufO5dKGt9WNZFnmvoSGl2@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Lei Wen <adrian.wenl@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Haojian Zhuang
>> <haojian.zhuang@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> From 18d589a078871a09dec0862241fedd2d1d07be85 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Lei Wen <leiwen@marvell.com>
>>> Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 14:05:46 +0800
>>> Subject: [PATCH 05/25] pxa3xx_nand: rework irq logic
>>>
>>> Enable all irq when we start the nand controller, and
>>> put all the transaction logic in the pxa3xx_nand_irq.
>>>
>>
>> Didn't look into the change too much, but the idea sounds to me like
>> chaining all the logic with different IRQ events, which was my original
>> reason of having different states. And considering the page read/write
>> is actually to an internal SRAM within the controller, I guess it's quick
>> enough. (though I'd suggest to do some experiments of time profiling
>> to see if it's going to increase the interrupt latency)
>>
>>> By doing this way, we could dramatically increase the
>>> performance by avoid unnecessary delay.
>>>
>>
>> The removal of __read_id() doesn't look to be part of this patch, no?
>>
> For write_cmd function has been discard and __read_id function would
> not be used, if
> continue to keep the __read_id() definition would lead to make failure...
>
Well, the logic is: this change doesn't belong to this patch, so is it possible
to separate the change apart and still keep it compiling?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-22 10:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-18 5:34 [PATCH 05/25] pxa3xx_nand: rework irq logic Haojian Zhuang
2010-06-18 6:50 ` Eric Miao
2010-06-22 9:34 ` Lei Wen
2010-06-22 10:02 ` Eric Miao [this message]
2010-06-22 11:24 ` Lei Wen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-31 6:05 Lei Wen
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=AANLkTinzmIud44FuZhZSs94yo16F0ipP-uPdX9gAhdPf@mail.gmail.com \
--to=eric.y.miao@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).