On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> +static int mhu_send_data(struct mbox_chan *chan, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct mhu_link *mlink = chan->con_priv;
>> + u32 *arg = data;
>
> Arnd doesn't like this and had suggestions in some other thread.
>
No, Arnd suggested doing it this way. And another platform's driver
was made to do this way.
>> + writel_relaxed(*arg, mlink->tx_reg + INTR_SET_OFS);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int mhu_startup(struct mbox_chan *chan)
>> +{
>> + struct mhu_link *mlink = chan->con_priv;
>> + u32 val;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + val = readl_relaxed(mlink->tx_reg + INTR_STAT_OFS);
>> + writel_relaxed(val, mlink->tx_reg + INTR_CLR_OFS);
>> +
>> + ret = request_irq(mlink->irq, mhu_rx_interrupt,
>> + IRQF_SHARED, "mhu_link", chan);
>
>
> Any reason we can't move this to probe and have {en,dis}able_irq here if
> needed. I has seen it was too heavy to have these especially when
> sending small packets.
>
I see you used to do memcpy in irq-handler
https://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/arm/kernel.git/blob/HEAD:/drivers/mailbox/arm_mhu.c
perhaps you were using your old driver?
If you use this new driver, and send packets so often that
request-release irq has effect, maybe should hold the mailbox
reference for lifetime. I remember suggesting you that already and I
remember you said that's how it was.
-Jassi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
