Hi,
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 4:03 PM Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 10:18 AM Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/ce.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/ce.h
> > index a440aaf74aa4..666ce384a1d8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/ce.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/ce.h
> ...
> > @@ -376,12 +377,9 @@ static inline u32 ath10k_ce_interrupt_summary(struct ath10k *ar)
> > {
> > struct ath10k_ce *ce = ath10k_ce_priv(ar);
> >
> > - if (!ar->hw_params.per_ce_irq)
>
> If I'm reading correctly, you're removing the only remaining use of
> 'per_ce_irq'. Should we kill the field entirely?
Ah, you are indeed correct! I hadn't noticed that. Unless I hear
otherwise, I'll send a v2 tomorrow that removes the field entirely.
> Or perhaps we should
> leave some kind of WARN_ON() (BUG_ON()?) if this function is called
> erroneously with per_ce_irq==true? But I suppose this driver is full
> of landmines if the CE API is used incorrectly.
Yeah, I originally had a WARN_ON() here and then took it out because
it seemed like extra overhead and, as you said, someone writing the
code has to know how the API works already I think. ...but I'll add
it back in if people want.
> > - return CE_WRAPPER_INTERRUPT_SUMMARY_HOST_MSI_GET(
> > - ce->bus_ops->read32((ar), CE_WRAPPER_BASE_ADDRESS +
> > - CE_WRAPPER_INTERRUPT_SUMMARY_ADDRESS));
> > - else
> > - return ath10k_ce_gen_interrupt_summary(ar);
> > + return CE_WRAPPER_INTERRUPT_SUMMARY_HOST_MSI_GET(
> > + ce->bus_ops->read32((ar), CE_WRAPPER_BASE_ADDRESS +
> > + CE_WRAPPER_INTERRUPT_SUMMARY_ADDRESS));
> > }
> >
> > /* Host software's Copy Engine configuration. */
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/snoc.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/snoc.h
> > index a3dd06f6ac62..5095d1893681 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/snoc.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/snoc.h
> > @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct ath10k_snoc {
> > unsigned long flags;
> > bool xo_cal_supported;
> > u32 xo_cal_data;
> > + DECLARE_BITMAP(pending_ce_irqs, CE_COUNT_MAX);
>
> Do you need to clear this map if the interface goes down or if there's
> a firmware crash? Right now, I don't think there's a guarantee that
> we'll run through a NAPI poll in those cases, which is the only place
> you clear the map, and if the hardware/firmware has been reset, the
> state map is probably not valid.
Seems like a good idea. Is the right place at the start of
ath10k_snoc_hif_start()?
> Otherwise, looks OK to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for the review!
-Doug
