Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c | 11 ++++++-----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
index 4dfb4c1..0596c12 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
@@ -514,7 +514,8 @@ static int tegra_i2c_empty_rx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
* If there is a partial word at the end of buf, handle it manually to
* prevent overwriting past the end of buf
*/
- if (rx_fifo_avail > 0 && buf_remaining > 0) {
+ if (rx_fifo_avail > 0 &&
+ (buf_remaining > 0 && buf_remaining < BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD)) {
BUG_ON(buf_remaining > 3);
val = i2c_readl(i2c_dev, I2C_RX_FIFO);
val = cpu_to_le32(val);
@@ -557,11 +558,10 @@ static int tegra_i2c_fill_tx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
words_to_transfer = tx_fifo_avail;
/*
- * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
+ * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
* to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to 0) we
* have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
- * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
- * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
+ * not maskable).
*/
buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
tx_fifo_avail -= words_to_transfer;
@@ -580,7 +580,8 @@ static int tegra_i2c_fill_tx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
* prevent reading past the end of buf, which could cross a page
* boundary and fault.
*/
- if (tx_fifo_avail > 0 && buf_remaining > 0) {
+ if (tx_fifo_avail > 0 &&
+ (buf_remaining > 0 && buf_remaining < BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD)) {
BUG_ON(buf_remaining > 3);
memcpy(&val, buf, buf_remaining);
val = le32_to_cpu(val);
--
2.7.4
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 03:51:13AM -0700, Bitan Biswas wrote:
> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
I applied patches 1-5 to my for-next tree now. No need to resend them
anymore, you can focus on the remaining patches now.
Question: The nominal maintainer for this driver is
Laxman Dewangan <[email protected]> (supporter:TEGRA I2C DRIVER)
I wonder if he is still around and interested?
That aside, thanks a lot Dmitry for the review of this series!
11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
> index 4dfb4c1..0596c12 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
> @@ -514,7 +514,8 @@ static int tegra_i2c_empty_rx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
> * If there is a partial word at the end of buf, handle it manually to
> * prevent overwriting past the end of buf
> */
> - if (rx_fifo_avail > 0 && buf_remaining > 0) {
> + if (rx_fifo_avail > 0 &&
> + (buf_remaining > 0 && buf_remaining < BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD)) {
The buf_remaining >= BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD is not possible to happen
because there are three possible cases:
1) buf_remaining > rx_fifo_avail * 4:
In this case rx_fifo_avail = 0
2) buf_remaining < rx_fifo_avail * 4;
In this case buf_remaining is always < 4 because
words_to_transfer is a buf_remaining rounded down to 4
and then divided by 4. Hence:
buf_remaining -= (buf_remaining / 4) * 4 always results
into buf_remaining < 4.
3) buf_remaining == rx_fifo_avail * 4:
In this case rx_fifo_avail = 0 and buf_remaining = 0.
Case 2 should never happen and means that something gone wrong.
> BUG_ON(buf_remaining > 3);
> val = i2c_readl(i2c_dev, I2C_RX_FIFO);
> val = cpu_to_le32(val);
> @@ -557,11 +558,10 @@ static int tegra_i2c_fill_tx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
> words_to_transfer = tx_fifo_avail;
>
> /*
> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to 0) we
> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
> + * not maskable).
> */
> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
> tx_fifo_avail -= words_to_transfer;
> @@ -580,7 +580,8 @@ static int tegra_i2c_fill_tx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
> * prevent reading past the end of buf, which could cross a page
> * boundary and fault.
> */
> - if (tx_fifo_avail > 0 && buf_remaining > 0) {
> + if (tx_fifo_avail > 0 &&
> + (buf_remaining > 0 && buf_remaining < BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD)) {
> BUG_ON(buf_remaining > 3);
> memcpy(&val, buf, buf_remaining);
> val = le32_to_cpu(val);
>
Same as for RX.
11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
> ---
[snip]
> /*
> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to 0) we
> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
> + * not maskable).
> */
> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
Looks like the comment could be removed altogether because it doesn't
make sense since interrupt handler is under xfer_lock which is kept
locked during of tegra_i2c_xfer_msg().
Moreover the comment says that "PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is not maskable",
but then what I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking does?
> Most of patches are coming from the downstream as part of upstream effort.
> Hence not reviewing explicitly.
It would help me a lot if you could ack the patches, then, once you are
fine with them. I am really relying on driver maintainers these days. An
ack or rev from them is kinda required and speeds up things
significantly.
13.06.2019 14:30, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>
>
> On 6/12/19 7:30 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> /*
>>> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
>>> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
>>> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to
>>> 0) we
>>> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
>>> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
>>> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
>>> + * not maskable).
>>> */
>>> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
>>
>> Looks like the comment could be removed altogether because it doesn't
>> make sense since interrupt handler is under xfer_lock which is kept
>> locked during of tegra_i2c_xfer_msg().
> I would push a separate patch to remove this comment because of
> xfer_lock in ISR now.
>
>>
>> Moreover the comment says that "PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is not maskable",
>> but then what I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking does?
>>
> I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking support available in Tegra chips
> newer than Tegra30 allows one to not see interrupt after Packet transfer
> complete. With the xfer_lock in ISR the scenario discussed in comment
> can be ignored.
Also note that xfer_lock could be removed and replaced with a just
irq_enable/disable() calls in tegra_i2c_xfer_msg() because we only care
about IRQ not firing during of the preparation process.
It also looks like tegra_i2c_[un]nmask_irq isn't really needed and all
IRQ's could be simply unmasked during the driver's probe, in that case
it may worth to add a kind of "in-progress" flag to catch erroneous
interrupts.
On 6/12/19 3:24 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 03:51:13AM -0700, Bitan Biswas wrote:
>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>
> I applied patches 1-5 to my for-next tree now. No need to resend them
> anymore, you can focus on the remaining patches now.
>
> Question: The nominal maintainer for this driver is
>
> Laxman Dewangan <[email protected]> (supporter:TEGRA I2C DRIVER)
>
> I wonder if he is still around and interested?
>
> That aside, thanks a lot Dmitry for the review of this series!
>
Thanks Wolfram. I shall work on remaining patches.
On Wednesday 12 June 2019 03:54 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 03:51:13AM -0700, Bitan Biswas wrote:
>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
> I applied patches 1-5 to my for-next tree now. No need to resend them
> anymore, you can focus on the remaining patches now.
>
> Question: The nominal maintainer for this driver is
>
> Laxman Dewangan <[email protected]> (supporter:TEGRA I2C DRIVER)
>
> I wonder if he is still around and interested?
>
> That aside, thanks a lot Dmitry for the review of this series!
>
Most of patches are coming from the downstream as part of upstream
effort. Hence not reviewing explicitly.
On 6/12/19 7:30 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>> ---
>
> [snip]
>
>> /*
>> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
>> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
>> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to 0) we
>> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
>> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
>> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
>> + * not maskable).
>> */
>> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
>
> Looks like the comment could be removed altogether because it doesn't
> make sense since interrupt handler is under xfer_lock which is kept
> locked during of tegra_i2c_xfer_msg().
I would push a separate patch to remove this comment because of
xfer_lock in ISR now.
>
> Moreover the comment says that "PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is not maskable",
> but then what I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking does?
>
I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking support available in Tegra chips
newer than Tegra30 allows one to not see interrupt after Packet transfer
complete. With the xfer_lock in ISR the scenario discussed in comment
can be ignored.
-regards,
Bitan
On 6/12/19 6:55 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c | 11 ++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
>> index 4dfb4c1..0596c12 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
>> @@ -514,7 +514,8 @@ static int tegra_i2c_empty_rx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
>> * If there is a partial word at the end of buf, handle it manually to
>> * prevent overwriting past the end of buf
>> */
>> - if (rx_fifo_avail > 0 && buf_remaining > 0) {
>> + if (rx_fifo_avail > 0 &&
>> + (buf_remaining > 0 && buf_remaining < BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD)) {
>
> The buf_remaining >= BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD is not possible to happen
> because there are three possible cases:
>
> 1) buf_remaining > rx_fifo_avail * 4:
>
> In this case rx_fifo_avail = 0
>
> 2) buf_remaining < rx_fifo_avail * 4;
>
> In this case buf_remaining is always < 4 because
> words_to_transfer is a buf_remaining rounded down to 4
> and then divided by 4. Hence:
>
> buf_remaining -= (buf_remaining / 4) * 4 always results
> into buf_remaining < 4.
>
> 3) buf_remaining == rx_fifo_avail * 4:
>
> In this case rx_fifo_avail = 0 and buf_remaining = 0.
>
> Case 2 should never happen and means that something gone wrong.
>
Yes I now agree with you. The first condition "rx_fifo_avail > 0"
failure will take care and prevent need for additional checks.
>> BUG_ON(buf_remaining > 3);
>> val = i2c_readl(i2c_dev, I2C_RX_FIFO);
>> val = cpu_to_le32(val);
>> @@ -557,11 +558,10 @@ static int tegra_i2c_fill_tx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
>> words_to_transfer = tx_fifo_avail;
>>
>> /*
>> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
>> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
>> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to 0) we
>> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
>> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
>> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
>> + * not maskable).
>> */
>> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
>> tx_fifo_avail -= words_to_transfer;
>> @@ -580,7 +580,8 @@ static int tegra_i2c_fill_tx_fifo(struct tegra_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
>> * prevent reading past the end of buf, which could cross a page
>> * boundary and fault.
>> */
>> - if (tx_fifo_avail > 0 && buf_remaining > 0) {
>> + if (tx_fifo_avail > 0 &&
>> + (buf_remaining > 0 && buf_remaining < BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD)) {
>> BUG_ON(buf_remaining > 3);
>> memcpy(&val, buf, buf_remaining);
>> val = le32_to_cpu(val);
>>
>
> Same as for RX.
>
Yes shall discard this patch from the next update.
-Thanks,
Bitan
On 6/13/19 5:28 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 13.06.2019 14:30, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>
>>
>> On 6/12/19 7:30 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>> 11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>>>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
>>>> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
>>>> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to
>>>> 0) we
>>>> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
>>>> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
>>>> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
>>>> + * not maskable).
>>>> */
>>>> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
>>>
>>> Looks like the comment could be removed altogether because it doesn't
>>> make sense since interrupt handler is under xfer_lock which is kept
>>> locked during of tegra_i2c_xfer_msg().
>> I would push a separate patch to remove this comment because of
>> xfer_lock in ISR now.
>>
>>>
>>> Moreover the comment says that "PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is not maskable",
>>> but then what I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking does?
>>>
>> I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking support available in Tegra chips
>> newer than Tegra30 allows one to not see interrupt after Packet transfer
>> complete. With the xfer_lock in ISR the scenario discussed in comment
>> can be ignored.
>
> Also note that xfer_lock could be removed and replaced with a just
> irq_enable/disable() calls in tegra_i2c_xfer_msg() because we only care
> about IRQ not firing during of the preparation process.
This should need sufficient testing hence let us do it in a different
series.
>
> It also looks like tegra_i2c_[un]nmask_irq isn't really needed and all
> IRQ's could be simply unmasked during the driver's probe, in that case
> it may worth to add a kind of "in-progress" flag to catch erroneous
> interrupts.
>
TX interrupt needs special handling if this change is done. Hence I
think it should be taken up after sufficient testing in a separate patch.
-regards,
Bitan
14.06.2019 12:50, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>
>
> On 6/13/19 5:28 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 13.06.2019 14:30, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/12/19 7:30 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>> 11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>>>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>>>>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
>>>>> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
>>>>> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to
>>>>> 0) we
>>>>> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
>>>>> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
>>>>> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
>>>>> + * not maskable).
>>>>> */
>>>>> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
>>>>
>>>> Looks like the comment could be removed altogether because it doesn't
>>>> make sense since interrupt handler is under xfer_lock which is kept
>>>> locked during of tegra_i2c_xfer_msg().
>>> I would push a separate patch to remove this comment because of
>>> xfer_lock in ISR now.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Moreover the comment says that "PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is not maskable",
>>>> but then what I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking does?
>>>>
>>> I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking support available in Tegra chips
>>> newer than Tegra30 allows one to not see interrupt after Packet transfer
>>> complete. With the xfer_lock in ISR the scenario discussed in comment
>>> can be ignored.
>>
>> Also note that xfer_lock could be removed and replaced with a just
>> irq_enable/disable() calls in tegra_i2c_xfer_msg() because we only care
>> about IRQ not firing during of the preparation process.
> This should need sufficient testing hence let us do it in a different series.
I don't think that there is much to test here since obviously it should work.
>>
>> It also looks like tegra_i2c_[un]nmask_irq isn't really needed and all
>> IRQ's could be simply unmasked during the driver's probe, in that case
>> it may worth to add a kind of "in-progress" flag to catch erroneous
>> interrupts.
>>
> TX interrupt needs special handling if this change is done. Hence I think it should be
> taken up after sufficient testing in a separate patch.
This one is indeed a bit more trickier. Probably another alternative could be to keep GIC
interrupt disabled while no transfer is performed, then you'll have to request interrupt
in a disabled state using IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag.
And yes, that all should be a separate changes if you're going to implement them.
On 6/14/19 6:02 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 14.06.2019 12:50, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>
>>
>> On 6/13/19 5:28 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>> 13.06.2019 14:30, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/12/19 7:30 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>>> 11.06.2019 13:51, Bitan Biswas пишет:
>>>>>> Fix expression for residual bytes(less than word) transfer
>>>>>> in I2C PIO mode RX/TX.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bitan Biswas <[email protected]>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> - * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this casues us
>>>>>> + * Update state before writing to FIFO. If this causes us
>>>>>> * to finish writing all bytes (AKA buf_remaining goes to
>>>>>> 0) we
>>>>>> * have a potential for an interrupt (PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is
>>>>>> - * not maskable). We need to make sure that the isr sees
>>>>>> - * buf_remaining as 0 and doesn't call us back re-entrantly.
>>>>>> + * not maskable).
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> buf_remaining -= words_to_transfer * BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD;
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like the comment could be removed altogether because it doesn't
>>>>> make sense since interrupt handler is under xfer_lock which is kept
>>>>> locked during of tegra_i2c_xfer_msg().
>>>> I would push a separate patch to remove this comment because of
>>>> xfer_lock in ISR now.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Moreover the comment says that "PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE is not maskable",
>>>>> but then what I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking does?
>>>>>
>>>> I2C_INT_PACKET_XFER_COMPLETE masking support available in Tegra chips
>>>> newer than Tegra30 allows one to not see interrupt after Packet transfer
>>>> complete. With the xfer_lock in ISR the scenario discussed in comment
>>>> can be ignored.
>>>
>>> Also note that xfer_lock could be removed and replaced with a just
>>> irq_enable/disable() calls in tegra_i2c_xfer_msg() because we only care
>>> about IRQ not firing during of the preparation process.
>> This should need sufficient testing hence let us do it in a different series.
>
> I don't think that there is much to test here since obviously it should work.
>
I shall push a patch for this as basic i2c read write test passed.
>>>
>>> It also looks like tegra_i2c_[un]nmask_irq isn't really needed and all
>>> IRQ's could be simply unmasked during the driver's probe, in that case
>>> it may worth to add a kind of "in-progress" flag to catch erroneous
>>> interrupts.
>>>
>> TX interrupt needs special handling if this change is done. Hence I think it should be
>> taken up after sufficient testing in a separate patch.
>
> This one is indeed a bit more trickier. Probably another alternative could be to keep GIC
> interrupt disabled while no transfer is performed, then you'll have to request interrupt
> in a disabled state using IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag.
>
> And yes, that all should be a separate changes if you're going to implement them.
>
OK
-Thanks,
Bitan