From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A51C433EF for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:19:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8D06321B for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:19:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233888AbhKPKWO (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 05:22:14 -0500 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.220.28]:45552 "EHLO smtp-out1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233889AbhKPKVU (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 05:21:20 -0500 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D787212C8; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:18:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1637057903; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=JZNotH4MhP4IRqUljB1EhjoGVEhettHZe/9E+z6YmQ0=; b=v2o+9r+FvGTRojafLqsazDsK8guTamynCfqIk6u6oeMjbdd/l4lNWl9Sd9anp9BfLyQakv Xla8AK1drArgo30yW+QlOfZk1crGN2HLXI/WmifHUvSwEeUAXnYNrMhKujvfq5RYlbhJ7v TR6vjdZpVFmbDMYFgmvxrQe54j2LD9o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1637057903; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=JZNotH4MhP4IRqUljB1EhjoGVEhettHZe/9E+z6YmQ0=; b=B1J73o/HRHBClAQNc6NIonIdPTtCfszSGBwwxg23fFq1eYOVmN3N09knKhCp38xuV7P2eL uPUW6U3inUBiM3Bg== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFD6813BA1; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id 8odEOG6Fk2EyJAAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:18:22 +0000 Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 11:18:21 +0100 From: Jean Delvare To: Jarkko Nikula Cc: Andy Shevchenko , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang , ck+kernelbugzilla@bl4ckb0x.de, stephane.poignant@protonmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: i801: Fix interrupt storm from SMB_ALERT signal Message-ID: <20211116111821.75ba4ea6@endymion> In-Reply-To: <71a5c6d4-4ae8-2c54-78e7-94a37b43a986@linux.intel.com> References: <20211110141032.2429745-1-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> <71a5c6d4-4ae8-2c54-78e7-94a37b43a986@linux.intel.com> Organization: SUSE Linux X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:39:28 +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 11/10/21 7:16 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 04:10:32PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > >> /* > >> - * Clear irq sources and report transaction result. > >> + * Clear remaining irq sources: Completion of last command, errors > >> + * and the SMB_ALERT signal. SMB_ALERT status is set after signal > >> + * assertion independently is the interrupt generation blocked or not > > > > is --> if ? > > hmm, I don't know which one is correct or neither. Or should it be > something like "independently of whether the interrupt generation is > blocked or not"? Grammar polices, please help me :-) ... independently of the interrupt generation being blocked or not. Sounds better? (I think your "of whether" variant is grammatically correct too, if you prefer that.) -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support