On 06/17/2014 04:54 PM, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
> On 17/06/2014 05:39, Jongsung Kim :
>> On 06/17/2014 06:28 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
>>> Shouldn't it be sufficient to replace 'MACB_BIT(RCOMP) with
>>> 'MACB_RX_INT_FLAGS'
>>> to clear all the RX IRQ flags.
>>
>> I'm afraid not.
>>
>>
On 17/06/2014 05:39, Jongsung Kim :
> On 06/17/2014 06:28 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
>> Shouldn't it be sufficient to replace 'MACB_BIT(RCOMP) with
>> 'MACB_RX_INT_FLAGS'
>> to clear all the RX IRQ flags.
>
> I'm afraid not.
>
> You know, this driver initially targeted only GEMs configured with
On 06/17/2014 12:50 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 11:38AM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
>> On 06/16/2014 11:56 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 02:00PM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
On 06/13/2014 12:44 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> This is now clearing all
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 11:38AM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 11:56 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 02:00PM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
> >> On 06/13/2014 12:44 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> >>> This is now clearing all IRQ flags which is probably not what we want
> >>
On 06/17/2014 06:28 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> Shouldn't it be sufficient to replace 'MACB_BIT(RCOMP) with
> 'MACB_RX_INT_FLAGS'
> to clear all the RX IRQ flags.
I'm afraid not.
You know, this driver initially targeted only GEMs configured with
"gem_irq_clear_read."
For this implementation of
On 06/16/2014 11:56 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 02:00PM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
>> On 06/13/2014 12:44 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
>>> This is now clearing all IRQ flags which is probably not what we want
>>> here. This is handling RX only. We still want the non-RX interrup
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 05:50PM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
> The "Rx used bit read" interrupt is enabled but not cleared for some
> systems with the ISR (Interrupt Status Register) configured as clear-
> on-write. This interrupt may be asserted when the CPU does not handle
> Rx-complete interrupts fo
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 02:00PM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
> On 06/13/2014 12:44 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> > Hi Jongsung,
>
> Hi Sören,
>
> > Does this interrupt need to be enabled? There is nothing checking
> > that bit and handling this IRQ in the handler, AFAICT. And you solve
> > this by sim
On 06/13/2014 12:44 AM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> Hi Jongsung,
Hi Sören,
> Does this interrupt need to be enabled? There is nothing checking
> that bit and handling this IRQ in the handler, AFAICT. And you solve
> this by simply clearing the bit. So, I wonder whether not enabling this
> IRQ in the
Hi Jongsung,
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 05:50PM +0900, Jongsung Kim wrote:
> The "Rx used bit read" interrupt is enabled but not cleared for some
> systems with the ISR (Interrupt Status Register) configured as clear-
> on-write.
Does this interrupt need to be enabled? There is nothing checking
that bi
The "Rx used bit read" interrupt is enabled but not cleared for some
systems with the ISR (Interrupt Status Register) configured as clear-
on-write. This interrupt may be asserted when the CPU does not handle
Rx-complete interrupts for a long time. (e.g., if the CPU is stopped
by debugger) Once ass
11 matches
Mail list logo
