Hi Ohad,

________________________________________
>From: Ohad Ben-Cohen [o...@wizery.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9:35 PM
>To: Sapiens, Rene; Guzman Lugo, Fernando
>Cc: Hiroshi DOYU; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; 
>linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Kanigeri, Hari
>Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] omap: mailbox: convert block api to kfifo
>
>Hi Rene,
>
>On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Sapiens, Rene <rene.sapi...@ti.com> wrote:
>> In mbox_rx_work() you are removing the lines that enable back the  mbox irq 
>> for the RX case, but inside  __mbox_rx_interrupt() this interrupt  is 
>> disabled in the case that the kfifo for Rx >mailbox gets full. So I think 
>> that we need to enable it back as soon as there is space in this kfifo.
>
>
>
>Actually these irq on/off lines are not part of my patch; they are
>introduced by patch 05/10 on top of which my patches were rebased.
>
>Nevertheless I agree with you - the kfifo migration patch should not
>affect that irq on/off behavior. It's probably just a rebase gotcha.
>
>But now that you point me to this irq on/off thing, it looks a bit
>broken in terms of multiple concurrent mbox support since it relies on
>a global rq_full state. I guess it'd be better to hold that rq_full
>state in the relevant mbox queue state itself.
>
>Fernando what do you think ?

Yes, you are right Ohad. Only should be disable the "new message" interrupt of 
the mailbox which kfifo is full.

regards,
Fernando.

>
>Thanks,
>Ohad.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to