From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:19:17 +0100 (BST) Received: from h155.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:41381 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S28643180AbYIWRTL (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:19:11 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.234] (unknown [10.150.0.9]) by imap.sh.mvista.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F35613ECC; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 10:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48D92545.7050307@ru.mvista.com> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:20:05 +0400 From: Sergei Shtylyov Organization: MontaVista Software Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: ru, en-us, en-gb MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Atsushi Nemoto Cc: bzolnier@gmail.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, ralf@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ide: Add tx4939ide driver (v2) References: <20080918.001342.52129176.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <48D57245.8060606@ru.mvista.com> <20080924.020459.128619366.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <20080924.020459.128619366.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 20604 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Hello. Atsushi Nemoto wrote: >>>+static int tx4939ide_dma_test_irq(ide_drive_t *drive) >>>+{ >>>+ ide_hwif_t *hwif = HWIF(drive); >>>+ void __iomem *base = TX4939IDE_BASE(hwif); >>>+ u16 ctl = tx4939ide_readw(base, TX4939IDE_int_ctl); >>>+ u8 dma_stat, stat; >>>+ u16 ide_int; >>>+ int found = 0; >>>+ >>>+ tx4939ide_check_error_ints(hwif, ctl); >>>+ ide_int = ctl & (TX4939IDE_INT_XFEREND | TX4939IDE_INT_HOST); >> Well, since you're effectively ignoring the BUSERR interrupt, there's >>no point in enabling it... > The BUSERR is not ignored. tx4939ide_check_error_ints() will print a > message. It would be better than just ignoring. I mean you're not accounting it as an interrupt. It will be reported anyway when the dma_timeout() method will call this method on timeout... ah, it wouldn't be called in this case since dma_time_expiry() will most probably return -1 seeing bit 1 of DMA status register set. You're right then... > --- > Atsushi Nemoto MBR, Sergei