From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966317AbcKXPGM (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:06:12 -0500 Received: from www.zeus03.de ([194.117.254.33]:53422 "EHLO mail.zeus03.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965739AbcKXPGL (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:06:11 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:06:08 +0100 From: Wolfram Sang To: Benjamin Tissoires Cc: Wolfram Sang , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] i2c: use an IRQ to report Host Notify events, not alert Message-ID: <20161124150608.GE4271@katana> References: <1476360640-12901-1-git-send-email-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> <1476360640-12901-7-git-send-email-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> <20161107002034.GB1442@katana> <20161121105248.GH2119@mail.corp.redhat.com> <20161122114922.GA3993@katana> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qOrJKOH36bD5yhNe" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161122114922.GA3993@katana> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --qOrJKOH36bD5yhNe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:49:22PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:52:48AM +0100, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > Hi Wolfram, > >=20 > > On Nov 07 2016 or thereabouts, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:10:40PM +0200, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > The current SMBus Host Notify implementation relies on .alert() to > > > > relay its notifications. However, the use cases where SMBus Host > > > > Notify is needed currently is to signal data ready on touchpads. > > > >=20 > > > > This is closer to an IRQ than a custom API through .alert(). > > > > Given that the 2 touchpad manufacturers (Synaptics and Elan) that > > > > use SMBus Host Notify don't put any data in the SMBus payload, the > > > > concept actually matches one to one. > > >=20 > > > I see the advantages. The only question I have: What if we encounter > > > devices in the future which do put data in the payload? Can this > > > mechanism be extended to handle that? > >=20 > > I guess I haven't convinced you with my answer. Is there anything I can > > do to get this series in v4.10 or do you prefer waiting for v4.11? >=20 > I consider this v4.10 material. I was thinking a little about how to not > lose data with consecutive interrupts but then -EBUSY came along. > Nonetheless, it looks to me like the proper path to follow... Applied to for-next, thanks! Fixed the following checkpatch warning for you: WARNING: struct irq_domain_ops should normally be const #250: FILE: drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c:1838: +static struct irq_domain_ops i2c_host_notify_irq_ops =3D { --qOrJKOH36bD5yhNe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJYNwHfAAoJEBQN5MwUoCm2MWwQALPoR9M/8bCbHoa5Y/9rNWyG SGMpl3yXmsQpbaho82jMO5cNrdjJD+57KT7xpHygz1MpLm/k2p4fDA6NgZ0KnMEX Kr0s1CB+A8pTGd7bxu6V95jzqldCpkMS4QtGp5Y7YQyyGVFids8VVRDQ+S2TpyjJ O3EpCrNFz2rCjCuT0HGfA5vfDI/FmySH+E2UMYbpFpg7zsyA4q59vKdL8rDadFDH 1kwTj7CysnCGFBumHN42SIYJk6XVQ/fKn+hTHLfTgGplV9jF0/bQGlRP0/+bjfzP 9Neq3xzW6UomrFBxoJVy8eBNnyfR7F9tXhST2IE3igqA8h/bjKSbu4fhLX5yKQN6 LjI6edXP6m0z+0Y+hkx3n4ro+vIIjoVSsrVKyz4syQNle3Eq0WMbgRYtvvDlAZzH A/QwK2YxgFGRoui4KVnM6HtVTGDysDJs213kDvlmfJbJBUb/xsR9uKqdAMawZfVM ClwdE1xwfYiMtB20kH3mV0Z9pNvpZKthkr2sezZrSWqd678YOzBJSNRkMFcy9ERF TIczQNPZZG5ht+Ds+mKGrr4/XDGR2J1TUBRkP+uH8914iRE1nU488QgLU+GMyOKJ Han+xaHoubbh5AE/8oY2wIa66IKs4H3omCiYAyZd2TJcxfxMSJNZFYBu3ODxsglw V+3Oah8e46FEnE04CWN9 =B0+j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qOrJKOH36bD5yhNe--