[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <efc9214f0911162028te62eca0h90f11b9b1e7a5d6e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:28:33 +0800
From: zeal <zealcook@...il.com>
To: "Figo.zhang" <figo1802@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ben@...tec.co.uk, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] KS8695: fix ks8695_rx_irq() bug.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Figo.zhang <figo1802@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 23:18 +0800, zeal wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Figo.zhang <figo1802@...il.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 22:58 +0800, zeal wrote:
>> >> From: zeal <zealcook@...il.com>
>> >>
>> >> Sorry for the previously patches. THEY'RE NOT RIGHT. It's my mistake.
>> >> Please forgive my noise.
>> >> Please review the following patches and ignore the last (v1).
>> >>
>> >> ks8695 rx irq is edge-level. Before arriving at irq handler, the
>> >> corresponding status bit has been clear(irq's ack).
>> >> So we should not check it after that.
>> >
>> > see <KS8695X Integrated Multi-Port Gateway Solution Register
>> > Description> Version 1.00
>> >
>> > Interrupt Status Register(INTST Offset 0xE208)
>> >
>> > it has said: This edge-triggered interrupt status is cleared by writting
>> > 1 , so we should write 1 to clear status bit manually.
>> >
>> Yeah, but irq_chip's ack has done that.
>> Please check arch/arm/mach-ks8695/irq.c ks8695_irq_edge_chip->ack()
>
> yes, you are right, but you have better add this description at commit
> log.
'the corresponding status bit has been clear(irq's ack)' is not enough?
[snip]
--
Thanks & Regards
zeal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists