On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 12:51:11PM +0530, Sricharan R wrote: > Hi Varada, > > On 6/14/2017 11:22 AM, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: > > This is needed for v1, where the i/o completion is not > > handled in the dma driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Gross <andy.gross@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <varada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/spi/spi-qup.c | 15 +++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-qup.c b/drivers/spi/spi-qup.c > > index 872de28..bd53e82 100644 > > --- a/drivers/spi/spi-qup.c > > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-qup.c > > @@ -510,9 +510,9 @@ static irqreturn_t spi_qup_qup_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > > > > writel_relaxed(qup_err, controller->base + QUP_ERROR_FLAGS); > > writel_relaxed(spi_err, controller->base + SPI_ERROR_FLAGS); > > - writel_relaxed(opflags, controller->base + QUP_OPERATIONAL); > > > > if (!xfer) { > > + writel_relaxed(opflags, controller->base + QUP_OPERATIONAL); > > This does look correct to remove acknowledging the QUP in normal case and > do it conditionally only when xfer = NULL. This is to probably mask the issue of getting erroneous/spurious IRQs. > > > dev_err_ratelimited(controller->dev, "unexpected irq %08x %08x %08x\n", > > qup_err, spi_err, opflags); > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > > @@ -540,7 +540,15 @@ static irqreturn_t spi_qup_qup_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > > error = -EIO; > > } > > > > - if (!spi_qup_is_dma_xfer(controller->mode)) { > > + if (spi_qup_is_dma_xfer(controller->mode)) { > > + writel_relaxed(opflags, controller->base + QUP_OPERATIONAL); > > + if (opflags & QUP_OP_IN_SERVICE_FLAG && > > + opflags & QUP_OP_MAX_INPUT_DONE_FLAG) > > + complete(&controller->rxc); > > + if (opflags & QUP_OP_OUT_SERVICE_FLAG && > > + opflags & QUP_OP_MAX_OUTPUT_DONE_FLAG) > > + complete(&controller->txc); > > + } else { > > Is this because in patch #8 that we do not populate the dma callback > for v1. If that is done, this should not be required at all, as the > complete would be signalled from the dma callback. I believe that is true. There shouldn't be any IRQs for DMA enabled transactions (at least BAM-dma). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html