[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a5accae02f840f7e25099c2ccd7b02ff@walle.cc>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:18:10 +0100
From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To: Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...il.com>
Cc: Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>,
Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>,
Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@...il.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: add IRQF_SHARED
Hi Daniel,
Am 2019-12-05 09:43, schrieb Daniel Baluta:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:40 AM Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
> wrote:
>>
>> The LS1028A SoC uses the same interrupt line for adjacent SAIs. Use
>> IRQF_SHARED to be able to use these SAIs simultaneously.
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for the patch. We have a similar change inside our internal tree
> (it is on my long TODO list to upstream :D).
>
> We add the shared flag conditionally on a dts property.
>
> Do you think it is a good idea to always add shared flag? I'm thinking
> on SAI IP integrations where the interrupt is edge triggered.
Mhh, I don't really get the point to make the flag conditionally. If
there is only one user, the flag won't hurt, correct?
If there are two users, we need the flag anyway.
> AFAIK edge triggered interrupts do not get along very well
> with sharing an interrupt line.
So in that case you shouldn't use shared edge triggered interrupts in
the
SoC in the first place, I guess.
-michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists