[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c71e09a8-0170-ce05-3fef-3e32c990b377@canonical.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 21:29:59 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To: Ashish Mhetre <amhetre@...dia.com>, thierry.reding@...il.com,
jonathanh@...dia.com, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Snikam@...dia.com, vdumpa@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [Patch V1 1/4] memory: tegra: Add support for mc interrupts
On 11/01/2022 19:45, Ashish Mhetre wrote:
> Implement new structure for function related to mc interrupts.
s/mc/MC/
> Move handle_irq into this structure.
> Add support for clearing interrupts.
The subject says you are adding support for MC interrupts, so before
they were not supported at all?
Here you also mention clearing of interrupts - another new feature. One
commit for refactoring (adding new structure) which does not change
functionality, second commit for adding new feature.
Different question - why do you need new structure for just two function
pointers? Why these different IRQ handling functions cannot be in
tegra_mc_ops? To me, it's unnecessary code complexity (plus performance
impact, but it's not that important). If this is really, really needed,
please describe the rationale in the commit message.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ashish Mhetre <amhetre@...dia.com>
> ---
> drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c | 14 +++++++++++---
> drivers/memory/tegra/mc.h | 1 +
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra114.c | 1 +
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra124.c | 2 ++
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra186.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra194.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra20.c | 6 +++++-
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra210.c | 1 +
> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra30.c | 1 +
> include/soc/tegra/mc.h | 7 ++++++-
> 10 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists