On 11/12/23 12:37, Jyan Chou [周芷安] wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static irqreturn_t dw_mci_cqe_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id) {
>>>>> + struct dw_mci *host = dev_id;
>>>>> + struct mmc_host *mmc = host->slot->mmc;
>>>>> + struct cqhci_host *cq_host = NULL;
>>>>> + int cmd_error = 0, data_error = 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (host->pdata && (host->pdata->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_CQE))
>>>>> + cq_host = mmc->cqe_private;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + dw_mci_get_int(host);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (host->pdata && (host->pdata->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_CQE)) {
>>>>> + if (!mmc->cqe_on && !cq_host->activated)
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't really look at internals like mmc->cqe_on or cq_host->activated.
>>>> There are the cqhci_host_ops ->enable() and ->disable() callbacks to
>>>> keep track of whether cqhci is expecting interrupts.
>>>
>>> Does this means we need to use cqhci_host_ops ->enable() and
>>> ->disable() callbacks instead of mmc->cqe_on && !cq_host->activated?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Yes. ->enable() is always called before cqhci operation and ->disable() before
>> non-cqhci operation, so they can be used to determine if an interrupt is for
>> cqhci.
>
> Thanks for your advice, and I got your point for calling cqhci_host_ops ->enable()
>
> and ->disable() callbacks, but the reason we used " if (!mmc->cqe_on && !cq_host->activated) "
>
> is that when sending command like cmd0, 1, 7, 8... in mmc_init_card before mmc_cmdq_enable,
>
> we need to use interrupt in legacy mode, it is much better to write in this way?
>
> + events = mci_readw(host, NORMAL_INT_STAT_R);
> - if (host->pdata && (host->pdata->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_CQE)) {
> - if (!mmc->cqe_on && !cq_host->activated)
> + if (mmc->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_CQE) {
> + if (!(events & CQE_EVENT))
> dw_mci_clr_signal_int(host);
>
> Using CQE_EVENT to determine whether Command Queue enable or not.
Unless you expect CQ interrupts before cqhci_host_ops ->enable()
is called, then you know it is legacy mode.
