From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01543C43603 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:18:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5FFC2464D for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:18:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=walle.cc header.i=@walle.cc header.b="lgf9fTIK" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729039AbfLEJSO (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Dec 2019 04:18:14 -0500 Received: from ssl.serverraum.org ([176.9.125.105]:35691 "EHLO ssl.serverraum.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728794AbfLEJSO (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Dec 2019 04:18:14 -0500 Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (web.serverraum.org [172.16.0.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.serverraum.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27B372305C; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:18:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=walle.cc; s=mail2016061301; t=1575537492; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2/Tl9y0vlxprYCBrvMb1aya8Frr3Lyxlo7NlxWTMqUU=; b=lgf9fTIKUVaOWWjXw/69XcooxlrBdTSukoRwUQcp1g0v/iSfnIdYWw+ete1aMsIxdMWXZO +36NxPACCHWHppH36Gg7oSGBQRvd7i3DE5L8XyacL/MHGEw5nVY8Nf1FE6RED7DZzTdSmC OMxzTgAFh2qQ1Csg8+1STlDZxi+7KTk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:18:10 +0100 From: Michael Walle To: Daniel Baluta Cc: Linux-ALSA , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Timur Tabi , Nicolin Chen , Xiubo Li , Fabio Estevam , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: add IRQF_SHARED In-Reply-To: References: <20191128223802.18228-1-michael@walle.cc> Message-ID: X-Sender: michael@walle.cc User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-Spamd-Bar: + X-Rspamd-Server: web X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 27B372305C X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.40 / 15.00]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWELVE(0.00)[12]; NEURAL_HAM(-0.00)[-0.696]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[alsa-project.org,lists.ozlabs.org,vger.kernel.org,kernel.org,gmail.com,perex.cz,suse.com]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Daniel, Am 2019-12-05 09:43, schrieb Daniel Baluta: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:40 AM Michael Walle > wrote: >> >> The LS1028A SoC uses the same interrupt line for adjacent SAIs. Use >> IRQF_SHARED to be able to use these SAIs simultaneously. > > Hi Michael, > > Thanks for the patch. We have a similar change inside our internal tree > (it is on my long TODO list to upstream :D). > > We add the shared flag conditionally on a dts property. > > Do you think it is a good idea to always add shared flag? I'm thinking > on SAI IP integrations where the interrupt is edge triggered. Mhh, I don't really get the point to make the flag conditionally. If there is only one user, the flag won't hurt, correct? If there are two users, we need the flag anyway. > AFAIK edge triggered interrupts do not get along very well > with sharing an interrupt line. So in that case you shouldn't use shared edge triggered interrupts in the SoC in the first place, I guess. -michael From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2975C43603 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5333D2464D for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="P0/wxxag"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=walle.cc header.i=@walle.cc header.b="lgf9fTIK" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5333D2464D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=walle.cc Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 379A31667; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:19:14 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 379A31667 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1575537604; bh=cWYxuSrUSYzu28VmJFVEfuUylUnSOea+T+M5AHSj0Os=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=P0/wxxagiNEdPt1blralsAZTzfRA+/jN3+XQkXrg+7RqMAFxwntS3nGK5radZonvx pUMMs5Qwuo4yzG7L76bC8ES9WHKqmrLZFL5swASR6cqYQkd6EHPHOi2cp7xqW3yzjE MBnZCIS1Ya1mRSRt6HE3Wvqp6eeJ9N5yQ9ccfX9E= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46504F8022B; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:18:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id A9B24F800F6; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:18:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (ssl.serverraum.org [176.9.125.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD527F800B4 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:18:12 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz AD527F800B4 Authentication-Results: alsa1.perex.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=walle.cc header.i=@walle.cc header.b="lgf9fTIK" Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (web.serverraum.org [172.16.0.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.serverraum.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27B372305C; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:18:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=walle.cc; s=mail2016061301; t=1575537492; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2/Tl9y0vlxprYCBrvMb1aya8Frr3Lyxlo7NlxWTMqUU=; b=lgf9fTIKUVaOWWjXw/69XcooxlrBdTSukoRwUQcp1g0v/iSfnIdYWw+ete1aMsIxdMWXZO +36NxPACCHWHppH36Gg7oSGBQRvd7i3DE5L8XyacL/MHGEw5nVY8Nf1FE6RED7DZzTdSmC OMxzTgAFh2qQ1Csg8+1STlDZxi+7KTk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:18:10 +0100 From: Michael Walle To: Daniel Baluta In-Reply-To: References: <20191128223802.18228-1-michael@walle.cc> Message-ID: X-Sender: michael@walle.cc User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-Spamd-Bar: + X-Rspamd-Server: web X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 27B372305C X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.40 / 15.00]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWELVE(0.00)[12]; NEURAL_HAM(-0.00)[-0.696]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[alsa-project.org,lists.ozlabs.org,vger.kernel.org,kernel.org,gmail.com,perex.cz,suse.com]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[] Cc: Linux-ALSA , Timur Tabi , Xiubo Li , Fabio Estevam , Takashi Iwai , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Liam Girdwood , Nicolin Chen , Mark Brown , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: add IRQF_SHARED X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" Hi Daniel, Am 2019-12-05 09:43, schrieb Daniel Baluta: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:40 AM Michael Walle > wrote: >> >> The LS1028A SoC uses the same interrupt line for adjacent SAIs. Use >> IRQF_SHARED to be able to use these SAIs simultaneously. > > Hi Michael, > > Thanks for the patch. We have a similar change inside our internal tree > (it is on my long TODO list to upstream :D). > > We add the shared flag conditionally on a dts property. > > Do you think it is a good idea to always add shared flag? I'm thinking > on SAI IP integrations where the interrupt is edge triggered. Mhh, I don't really get the point to make the flag conditionally. If there is only one user, the flag won't hurt, correct? If there are two users, we need the flag anyway. > AFAIK edge triggered interrupts do not get along very well > with sharing an interrupt line. So in that case you shouldn't use shared edge triggered interrupts in the SoC in the first place, I guess. -michael _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38603C43603 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A29B22464D for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:20:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=walle.cc header.i=@walle.cc header.b="lgf9fTIK" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A29B22464D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=walle.cc Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47T9DH6z1QzDqZW for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 20:20:15 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=walle.cc (client-ip=2a01:4f8:151:8464::1:2; helo=ssl.serverraum.org; envelope-from=michael@walle.cc; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=walle.cc Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=walle.cc header.i=@walle.cc header.b="lgf9fTIK"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (ssl.serverraum.org [IPv6:2a01:4f8:151:8464::1:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47T9BC4j7lzDqYP for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 20:18:27 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (web.serverraum.org [172.16.0.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.serverraum.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27B372305C; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:18:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=walle.cc; s=mail2016061301; t=1575537492; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2/Tl9y0vlxprYCBrvMb1aya8Frr3Lyxlo7NlxWTMqUU=; b=lgf9fTIKUVaOWWjXw/69XcooxlrBdTSukoRwUQcp1g0v/iSfnIdYWw+ete1aMsIxdMWXZO +36NxPACCHWHppH36Gg7oSGBQRvd7i3DE5L8XyacL/MHGEw5nVY8Nf1FE6RED7DZzTdSmC OMxzTgAFh2qQ1Csg8+1STlDZxi+7KTk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:18:10 +0100 From: Michael Walle To: Daniel Baluta Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: add IRQF_SHARED In-Reply-To: References: <20191128223802.18228-1-michael@walle.cc> Message-ID: X-Sender: michael@walle.cc User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-Spamd-Bar: + X-Rspamd-Server: web X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 27B372305C X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.40 / 15.00]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWELVE(0.00)[12]; NEURAL_HAM(-0.00)[-0.696]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[alsa-project.org,lists.ozlabs.org,vger.kernel.org,kernel.org,gmail.com,perex.cz,suse.com]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[] X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Linux-ALSA , Timur Tabi , Xiubo Li , Fabio Estevam , Takashi Iwai , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Liam Girdwood , Nicolin Chen , Mark Brown , Jaroslav Kysela , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Hi Daniel, Am 2019-12-05 09:43, schrieb Daniel Baluta: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:40 AM Michael Walle > wrote: >> >> The LS1028A SoC uses the same interrupt line for adjacent SAIs. Use >> IRQF_SHARED to be able to use these SAIs simultaneously. > > Hi Michael, > > Thanks for the patch. We have a similar change inside our internal tree > (it is on my long TODO list to upstream :D). > > We add the shared flag conditionally on a dts property. > > Do you think it is a good idea to always add shared flag? I'm thinking > on SAI IP integrations where the interrupt is edge triggered. Mhh, I don't really get the point to make the flag conditionally. If there is only one user, the flag won't hurt, correct? If there are two users, we need the flag anyway. > AFAIK edge triggered interrupts do not get along very well > with sharing an interrupt line. So in that case you shouldn't use shared edge triggered interrupts in the SoC in the first place, I guess. -michael