[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOAMb1CJ=G45G3JsxwP23GSdEOnDmY5xVoQmWLXaKJJv2cLOLg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:16:10 +0900
From: Chanho Min <chanho0207@...il.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Shreshtha Kumar Sahu <shreshthakumar.sahu@...ricsson.com>,
"Kim, Jong-Sung" <neidhard.kim@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clear previous interrupts after fifo is disabled
> RXFE _will_ be set. Think about it - RXFE means Receive Fifo Empty.
> If the receive fifo is empty, it _will_ be set.
I know meaning of the RXFE. I also don't understand why RXFE is set by
clearing FEN. We checked this by bellow debug codes.
fr_before = readw(uap->port.membase + UART01x_FR);
writew(0, uap->port.membase + uap->lcrh_rx);
fr_after = readw(uap->port.membase + UART01x_FR);
If rx interrupt is ocurred before, fr_after becomes 0x90 but fr_before is 0x80.
> And RIS is the _Raw_ interrupt status. That's the status _before_ the
> mask is acted upon.
>
> But it won't be delivered because the mask register is zero.
It can be delivered just after mask register is set to 1.
>> Root cause is that Rx interrupt set but Rx fifo is empty. If we just
>> remove the sentence for clearing LCRH, nothing happens and interrupt
>> handler don't this misbehave.
>
> No.
When we just removed the sentence for clearing LCRH, this hangup doesn't happen.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists