On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 03:43:13PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 07:31:37PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

> > > I am somewhat torn between a comment and renaming the function. I
> > > will try to add some sort of reasonable comment.

> > This doesn't sound like it's really acknowledging an IRQ - you have
> > level triggered interrupts here so if the interrupt isn't acknowledged
> > the interrupt handler will constantly be called.

> It kinda is acking the IRQ just at the firmware level, not the
> hardware level. The physical IRQ all gets acked through regmap
> so that is all handled. This code here lets the firmware know,
> which it will then use to decide whether it should send a new IRQ
> or not.

That's not an interrupt acknowlegement, it's a request for more data.

> I could perhaps rename the function to
> wm_adsp_buffer_request_irq? and buf->irq_ack to buf->irq_count?
> That might make the usage a little more clear.

That might be a bit clearer, yes - it looks like this is a mailbox on
the DSP that you're kicking?