From: yanh <yanh@lemote.com>
To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Cc: Wu Zhangjin <wuzhangjin@gmail.com>,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Arnaud Patard <apatard@mandriva.com>,
loongson-dev@googlegroups.com, zhangfx@lemote.com,
Philippe Vachon <philippe@cowpig.ca>,
Zhang Le <r0bertz@gentoo.org>, Erwan Lerale <erwan@thiscow.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 26/30] loongson: flush irq write operation
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 11:07:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1242788855.4382.64.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1242786494.4382.58.camel@localhost.localdomain>
在 2009-05-20三的 10:28 +0800,yanh写道:
> 在 2009-05-19二的 17:01 +0100,Ralf Baechle写道:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:37:17AM +0800, yanh wrote:
> >
> > > > The semantic of inX() / outX() is defined by the x86 architecture which
> > > > forbids posting I/O port writes. In short I think this one is papering
> > > > over a bug in the outX() implementation.
> > > Yes, the outX should do a delayed write, however it does not.
> > > So our solution is making a read to flush the write.
> >
> > Do you actually need all the inb() you added to get things to work or is
>
> Thanks for your reply.
> As my test, if there is no the read, there will be many spurious irqs.
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c b/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
> > index 01c0885..42d75d7 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
> > +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
> > @@ -177,10 +177,12 @@ handle_real_irq:
> > outb(cached_slave_mask, PIC_SLAVE_IMR);
> > outb(0x60+(irq&7), PIC_SLAVE_CMD);/* 'Specific EOI' to slave */
> > outb(0x60+PIC_CASCADE_IR, PIC_MASTER_CMD); /* 'Specific EOI' to master-IRQ2 */
> > + inb(PIC_MASTER_CMD);
> > } else {
> > inb(PIC_MASTER_IMR); /* DUMMY - (do we need this?) */
> > outb(cached_master_mask, PIC_MASTER_IMR);
> > outb(0x60+irq, PIC_MASTER_CMD); /* 'Specific EOI to master */
> > + inb(PIC_MASTER_CMD);
> > }
> > smtc_im_ack_irq(irq);
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8259A_lock, flags);
> >
> > sufficient to solve the problem?
> I have test this patch just now. It works well on yeeloong.
> I have one question what's the difference between the two patch?
My original patch only flush imr write. Really only one read is suffient. So no question about it now.
> >
> > Ralf
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-20 3:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-15 22:28 [PATCH 26/30] loongson: flush irq write operation Wu Zhangjin
2009-05-15 22:28 ` Wu Zhangjin
2009-05-18 16:36 ` Ralf Baechle
2009-05-19 2:37 ` yanh
2009-05-19 16:01 ` Ralf Baechle
2009-05-20 2:28 ` yanh
2009-05-20 3:07 ` yanh [this message]
2009-05-20 7:07 ` Ralf Baechle
2009-05-20 7:58 ` yanh
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=1242788855.4382.64.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=yanh@lemote.com \
--cc=apatard@mandriva.com \
--cc=erwan@thiscow.com \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=loongson-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=philippe@cowpig.ca \
--cc=r0bertz@gentoo.org \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=wuzhangjin@gmail.com \
--cc=zhangfx@lemote.com \
/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