linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ide: Add tx4939ide driver (v2)

To: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ide: Add tx4939ide driver (v2)
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:20:05 +0400
Cc: bzolnier@gmail.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, ralf@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20080924.020459.128619366.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Organization: MontaVista Software Inc.
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20080918.001342.52129176.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <48D57245.8060606@ru.mvista.com> <20080924.020459.128619366.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803
Hello.

Atsushi Nemoto wrote:

+static int tx4939ide_dma_test_irq(ide_drive_t *drive)
+{
+       ide_hwif_t *hwif = HWIF(drive);
+       void __iomem *base = TX4939IDE_BASE(hwif);
+       u16 ctl = tx4939ide_readw(base, TX4939IDE_int_ctl);
+       u8 dma_stat, stat;
+       u16 ide_int;
+       int found = 0;
+
+       tx4939ide_check_error_ints(hwif, ctl);
+       ide_int = ctl & (TX4939IDE_INT_XFEREND | TX4939IDE_INT_HOST);

Well, since you're effectively ignoring the BUSERR interrupt, there's no point in enabling it...

The BUSERR is not ignored.  tx4939ide_check_error_ints() will print a
message.  It would be better than just ignoring.

I mean you're not accounting it as an interrupt. It will be reported anyway when the dma_timeout() method will call this method on timeout... ah, it wouldn't be called in this case since dma_time_expiry() will most probably return -1 seeing bit 1 of DMA status register set. You're right then...

---
Atsushi Nemoto

MBR, Sergei

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>