Hi Miquel,
On 2/10/2018 9:25 AM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 2 Oct 2018
08:46:01 +0200:
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 2 Oct 2018
00:13:28 +0200:
Also, it looks like complete() is not called until the RDDREQ, WRDREQ
and WRCMDREQ are cleared in the interrupt handler [1], which is weird.
Miquel, do you happen to remember why you had to do that?
The RDDREQ, WRDREQ and WRCMDREQ events might potentially happen while
the interrupts are enabled while we only wait for R/B signalling. This
check is to avoid calling complete() on these situations.
Actually Boris is right on the fact that while the intention is good,
the writing of [1] is not accurate. Daniel, could you please test if
the following diff changes something with your setup, without your
patch?
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/marvell_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/marvell_nand.c
index bc2ef5209783..c7573ccdbacd 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/marvell_nand.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/marvell_nand.c
@@ -686,7 +686,7 @@ static irqreturn_t marvell_nfc_isr(int irq, void *dev_id)
marvell_nfc_disable_int(nfc, st & NDCR_ALL_INT);
- if (!(st & (NDSR_RDDREQ | NDSR_WRDREQ | NDSR_WRCMDREQ)))
+ if (st & (NDSR_RDY(0) | NDSR_RDY(1)))
complete(&nfc->complete);
return IRQ_HANDLED;
Yes! That seems to work nicely as a replacement for my patch.
Chris, how is that going on your board?
Thanks,
Daniel
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
