From: Mark Lord <liml@rtr.ca>
To: IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: libata, devm_*, and MSI ?
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:07:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4975F6D5.1040807@rtr.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4975F5C1.8090107@rtr.ca>
Mark Lord wrote:
> Tejun / Jeff,
>
> I am working on MSI support for sata_mv, and am trying to puzzle out
> exactly what the kernel expects for this. Looking at other drivers,
> both libata and otherwise, yields a variety of conflicting implementations.
>
> For starters, the MSI HOW-TO suggests that drivers must be careful
> to invoke pci_disable_msi() on module unload, but I don't see that
> happening anywhere in libata.
>
> Unless, Tejun, the devm_* routines automatically do this.. do they?
>
> Next, there's no mention of a need for invoking pci_intx() in the HOW-TO,
> yet some device drivers call it, and others do not.
>
> Eg. from ahci.c, we have this:
>
> if ((hpriv->flags & AHCI_HFLAG_NO_MSI) || pci_enable_msi(pdev))
> pci_intx(pdev, 1);
>
> Which agrees with the existing code in sata_mv:
>
> if (msi && pci_enable_msi(pdev))
> pci_intx(pdev, 1);
>
> Which seems to call pci_intx() only when MSI is *not* used. Fine.
> But then in sata_vsc.c, we do sort of the opposite:
>
> if (pci_enable_msi(pdev) == 0)
> pci_intx(pdev, 0);
>
> Either that one is wrong, or pci_intx() is unnecessary in all cases.
> Again, the MSI HOW-TO doesn't even mention this routine.
>
> Looking through the network drivers, it seems that some of them
> do the pci_intx(pdev,1) call for the cases where pci_enable_msi() fails,
> similar to ahci.c and sata_mv.c.
>
> But not all of them do that.
..
Looking through drivers/pci/*, it appears that the call to pci_intx()
should be totally redundant. pci_enable_msi() does pci_intx(pdev,0)
on success only, and doesn't touch it otherwise.
Similarly, pci_disable_msi() does pci_intx(pdev,1).
So, where does libata cause pci_disable_msi() to be invoked?
Or is that just missing at the moment?
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-20 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-20 16:03 libata, devm_*, and MSI ? Mark Lord
2009-01-20 16:07 ` Mark Lord [this message]
2009-01-20 17:44 ` Grant Grundler
2009-01-20 18:16 ` Mark Lord
2009-01-20 18:51 ` Grant Grundler
2009-01-20 19:54 ` Mark Lord
2009-01-21 11:59 ` Tejun Heo
2009-01-20 21:50 ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-01-21 3:39 ` Mark Lord
2009-01-21 4:02 ` Grant Grundler
2009-01-21 4:16 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-01-21 15:05 ` Mark Lord
2009-01-22 0:33 ` Robert Hancock
2009-01-23 18:11 ` Mark Lord
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=4975F6D5.1040807@rtr.ca \
--to=liml@rtr.ca \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.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).