Re: [PATCH] spi: Updated PXA2xx SSP SPI Driver

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Stephen Street <stephen@streetfiresound.com> wrote:
>
> ...
> > > +		unmap_dma_buffers(drv_data);
> > > +
> > > +		/* Calculate number of trailing bytes, read them */
> > > +		trailing_sssr = SSP_REG(sssr);
> > > +		if ((trailing_sssr & 0xf008) != 0xf000) {
> > > +			drv_data->rx = drv_data->rx_end -
> > > +					(((trailing_sssr >> 12) & 0x0f) + 1);
> > > +			drv_data->read(drv_data);
> > > +		}
> > > +		msg->actual_length += drv_data->len;
> > > +
> > > +		/* Release chip select if requested, transfer delays are
> > > +		 * handled in pump_transfers */
> > > +		if (drv_data->cs_change)
> > > +			drv_data->cs_control(PXA2XX_CS_DEASSERT);
> > > +
> > > +		/* Move to next transfer */
> > > +		msg->state = next_transfer(drv_data);
> > > +
> > > +		/* Schedule transfer tasklet */
> > > +		tasklet_schedule(&drv_data->pump_transfers);
> > > +
> > > +		return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	/* Never Fail */
> > 
> > WARN_ON(1)?
> > 
> > Why not return IRQ_NONE here?  That way, the IRQ system will save the
> > machine if the IRQ gets stuck.
> > 
> In my generally confused state I decided that if the IRQ handler ran
> then by definition I handled the interrupt. But thats probably not
> right.  Will change.

Yes, IRQ_NONE means "I don't have a clue why this IRQ handler was called -
none of my device registers indicate that anything needs servicing".

The core kernel IRQ handling will see that as a signal that perhaps the
hardware is busted and ultimately it will disable the entire IRQ line so
the machine can continue to struggle along.

> > This all looks very non-64-bit-capable.
> Just the null_dma_buf issue or something more?

Well, yes, that expression.  Generally if you get all the types right and
avoid typecasting, the compiler will shout at you about 64-bit-brokenness.

> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > > +static int stall_queue(struct driver_data *drv_data)
> > > +{
> > > +	unsigned long flags;
> > > +	unsigned limit = 500;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&drv_data->lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > +	drv_data->run = QUEUE_STALLED;
> > > +
> > > +	while (drv_data->busy && limit--) {
> > > +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&drv_data->lock, flags);
> > > +		msleep(10);
> > > +		spin_lock_irqsave(&drv_data->lock, flags);
> > > +	}
> > 
> > That looks a bit lame.  What's happening here?
> Sort of dumb, I agree.  I interpreted PM_EVENT_FREEZE to mean that I
> should stop processing the internal message queue but leave the queue
> intact so that it can be restarted. "stall_queue" does this by setting
> the run flag to QUEUE_STALLED (checked in pump_messages) and waiting for
> the busy to indicate the idle state.  I considered using an wait_queue
> but this seemed to much for to little.  Would you prefer a wait_queue?
> 

I guess a waitqueue would be nicer.  I don't recall seeing drivers doing
anything really fancy like this in response to a suspend request though. 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/