On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 03:39:11PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> i2c_dw_disable_int() and disable_int pointer in struct dw_i2c_dev were
> introduced by the commit 90312351fd1e ("i2c: designware: MASTER mode as
> separated driver") but it looks i2c_dw_disable_int() was never called
> through the pointer.
But the last part is not true... See below.
> Since i2c_dw_disable_int() is just masking interrupts and the direct
> DW_IC_INTR_MASK register write looks more clear in the code use that and
> remove from common code.
...
> else if (unlikely(dev->flags & ACCESS_INTR_MASK)) {
> /* Workaround to trigger pending interrupt */
> regmap_read(dev->map, DW_IC_INTR_MASK, &stat);
> - i2c_dw_disable_int(dev);
> + regmap_write(dev->map, DW_IC_INTR_MASK, 0);
> regmap_write(dev->map, DW_IC_INTR_MASK, stat);
Not sure I understood this dance. What exactly happen for the interrupts
that are getting masked and immediately unmasked? Is that the core of
the above mentioned workaround?
> }
...
> - dev->disable_int(dev);
> + regmap_write(dev->map, DW_IC_INTR_MASK, 0);
Called via pointer, didn't it?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
