Hi Rene,
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Guzman Lugo, Fernando <fernando.l...@ti.com> wrote: >>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. Once Fernando's fix will get thru, we will be able to fix the rebase error that you pointed out. Unfortunately I will not have any email access in the next 3 weeks, and I was hoping maybe you could submit a fix for this once Fernando's fix is accepted ? I would really like us to fix this early in the days of 2.6.36, maybe even during the merge window. Thanks a lot, Ohad. > > 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
