[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e8008a9827f7ef1db917ea03707be5d7@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 14:14:04 -0700
From: Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@...eaurora.org>
To: Asutosh Das <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: cang@...eaurora.org, vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org,
rnayak@...eaurora.org, vinholikatti@...il.com,
jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Venkat Gopalakrishnan <venkatg@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] scsi: ufs: make sure all interrupts are
processed
On 2018-05-03 04:07, Asutosh Das wrote:
> From: Venkat Gopalakrishnan <venkatg@...eaurora.org>
>
> As multiple requests are submitted to the ufs host controller in
> parallel there could be instances where the command completion
> interrupt arrives later for a request that is already processed
> earlier as the corresponding doorbell was cleared when handling
> the previous interrupt. Read the interrupt status in a loop after
> processing the received interrupt to catch such interrupts and
> handle it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkat Gopalakrishnan <venkatg@...eaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Asutosh Das <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> index c35a076..09b7a3f 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> @@ -5383,19 +5383,30 @@ static irqreturn_t ufshcd_intr(int irq, void
> *__hba)
> u32 intr_status, enabled_intr_status;
> irqreturn_t retval = IRQ_NONE;
> struct ufs_hba *hba = __hba;
> + int retries = hba->nutrs;
>
> spin_lock(hba->host->host_lock);
> intr_status = ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_INTERRUPT_STATUS);
> - enabled_intr_status =
> - intr_status & ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_INTERRUPT_ENABLE);
>
> - if (intr_status)
> - ufshcd_writel(hba, intr_status, REG_INTERRUPT_STATUS);
> + /*
> + * There could be max of hba->nutrs reqs in flight and in worst case
> + * if the reqs get finished 1 by 1 after the interrupt status is
> + * read, make sure we handle them by checking the interrupt status
> + * again in a loop until we process all of the reqs before returning.
> + */
> + do {
> + enabled_intr_status =
> + intr_status & ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_INTERRUPT_ENABLE);
> + if (intr_status)
> + ufshcd_writel(hba, intr_status, REG_INTERRUPT_STATUS);
> + if (enabled_intr_status) {
> + ufshcd_sl_intr(hba, enabled_intr_status);
> + retval = IRQ_HANDLED;
> + }
> +
> + intr_status = ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_INTERRUPT_STATUS);
> + } while (intr_status && --retries);
>
> - if (enabled_intr_status) {
> - ufshcd_sl_intr(hba, enabled_intr_status);
> - retval = IRQ_HANDLED;
> - }
> spin_unlock(hba->host->host_lock);
> return retval;
> }
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@...eaurora.org>
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists