Hi Bingbu,
On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 03:47:54PM +0800, Bingbu Cao wrote:
> Sakari and Stanislaw,
>
> On 11/1/24 3:46 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >>>> @@ -386,10 +382,8 @@ irqreturn_t ipu6_buttress_isr(int irq, void *isp_ptr)
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> if (irq_status & BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING) {
> >>>> - dev_dbg(&isp->pdev->dev,
> >>>> - "BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING\n");
> >>>> - ipu6_buttress_ipc_recv(isp, &b->ish, &b->ish.recv_data);
> >>>> - complete(&b->ish.recv_complete);
> >>>> + dev_warn(&isp->pdev->dev,
> >>>> + "BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING\n");
> >>>
> >>> I think this is a unrelated change, right?
> >>
> >> I mean the change from dev_dbg() to dev_warn().
> >
> > We're not handling these interrupts anymore in any way.
> >
> > I wonder if the ipu6_buttress_ipc_recv() call should still remain in place,
> > even if we really do nothing with these. It looks like some kind of an
> > acknowledgement mechanism.
>
> I just confirm that IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING and IPC_EXEC_DONE_BY_ISH are
> not valid anymore from IPU6, I think the handling here and below could be
> removed.
Do you know which IPU version still needed it?
There are folks who'd like to add IPU4 support to the driver but they can
add it back if it's needed.
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
