[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <df121ab9-a84e-41ac-057a-e7e9d0cbab48@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 16:45:24 +0100
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, willy.mh.wolff.ml@...il.com,
k.konieczny@...sung.com, b.zolnierkie@...sung.com,
chanwoo@...nel.org, myungjoo.ham@...sung.com,
kyungmin.park@...sung.com, s.nawrocki@...sung.com, kgene@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memory: samsung: exynos5422-dmc: Adjust polling
interval and uptreshold
On 7/10/20 3:49 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 02:41:28PM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/10/20 2:19 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 03:13:18PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > In such case, maybe as you said, let's switch to polling mode
>>> unconditionally?
>>
>> I can make happen that the polling mode will be unconditionally
>> set as default.
>>
>> Do you think that the interrupt mode code can still stay in the
>> driver, because maybe in future could be fixed?
>
> How interrupt mode would exist in such case? Or rather: how would it be
> used? There is no point to keep dead code and code once removed, can be
> easily brought back.
I can make a module param i.e. irq-mode=1, while in default where
the user don't provide param, we use polling mode. Then I don't have to
remove DT interrupts and the related code from the driver.
Regards,
Lukasz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists