From: lars@metafoo•de (Lars-Peter Clausen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V2] media: i2c: Add ADV761X support
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 17:48:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5296224A.6060906@metafoo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2150651.hQNra4Rlob@avalon>
[...]
>>>>>> The driver enables multiple interrupts on the chip, however, the
>>>>>> adv7604_isr callback doesn't seem to handle them correctly.
>>>>>> According to the docs:
>>>>>> "If an interrupt event occurs, and then a second interrupt event occurs
>>>>>> before the system controller has cleared or masked the first interrupt
>>>>>> event, the ADV7611 does not generate a second interrupt signal."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, the interrupt_service_routine doesn't account for that.
>>>>>> For example, in case fmt_change interrupt happens while
>>>>>> fmt_change_digital interrupt is being processed by the adv7604_isr
>>>>>> routine. If fmt_change status is set just before we clear
>>>>>> fmt_change_digital, we never clear fmt_change. Thus, we end up with
>>>>>> fmt_change interrupt missed and therefore further interrupts disabled.
>>>>>> I've tried to call the adv7604_isr routine in a loop and return from
>>>>>> the worlqueue only when all interrupt status bits are cleared. This did
>>>>>> help a bit, but sometimes I started getting lots of I2C read/write
>>>>>> errors for some reason.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure if there is much that can be done about this. The code
>>>>> reads the interrupt status, then clears the interrupts right after.
>>>>> There is always a race condition there since this isn't atomic ('read
>>>>> and clear'). Unless Lars-Peter has a better idea?
>>>>>
>>>>> What can be improved, though, is to clear not just the interrupts that
>>>>> were read, but all the interrupts that are unmasked. You are right, you
>>>>> could loose an interrupt that way.
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't level-trigerred interrupts fix the issue ?
>>
>> In this case we need to disable the IRQ line in the IRQ handler and
>> re-enable it in the workqueue. (we can't call the interrupt service routine
>> from the interrupt context.)
>
> Can't we just flag the interrupt in a non-threaded IRQ handler, acknowledge
> the interrupt and then schedule work on a workqueue for the bottom half ?
Acknowledging the interrupt will require a non IRQ context, since it has to
do I2C transfers.
- Lars
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-27 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1384520071-16463-1-git-send-email-valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com>
[not found] ` <5295E231.9030200@cisco.com>
[not found] ` <5295E641.6060603@cogentembedded.com>
2013-11-27 16:40 ` [PATCH V2] media: i2c: Add ADV761X support Laurent Pinchart
2013-11-27 16:48 ` Lars-Peter Clausen [this message]
2013-11-29 10:37 ` Linus Walleij
2013-11-29 10:45 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2013-11-29 12:14 ` Valentine
2013-11-29 13:46 ` Linus Walleij
2013-11-29 13:42 ` Linus Walleij
2013-11-29 13:48 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2013-11-29 19:52 ` Linus Walleij
2013-11-29 20:03 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-11-29 20:05 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2013-11-29 20:09 ` Linus Walleij
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5296224A.6060906@metafoo.de \
--to=lars@metafoo$(echo .)de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox