Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966487AbcKXPKc (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:10:32 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41664 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965958AbcKXPK2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:10:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:10:18 +0100 From: Benjamin Tissoires To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Wolfram Sang , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] i2c: use an IRQ to report Host Notify events, not alert Message-ID: <20161124151018.GS2119@mail.corp.redhat.com> References: <1476360640-12901-1-git-send-email-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> <1476360640-12901-7-git-send-email-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> <20161107002034.GB1442@katana> <20161121105248.GH2119@mail.corp.redhat.com> <20161122114922.GA3993@katana> <20161124150608.GE4271@katana> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161124150608.GE4271@katana> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.27]); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:10:23 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1734 Lines: 43 On Nov 24 2016 or thereabouts, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:49:22PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:52:48AM +0100, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > Hi Wolfram, > > > > > > On Nov 07 2016 or thereabouts, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:10:40PM +0200, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > > The current SMBus Host Notify implementation relies on .alert() to > > > > > relay its notifications. However, the use cases where SMBus Host > > > > > Notify is needed currently is to signal data ready on touchpads. > > > > > > > > > > This is closer to an IRQ than a custom API through .alert(). > > > > > Given that the 2 touchpad manufacturers (Synaptics and Elan) that > > > > > use SMBus Host Notify don't put any data in the SMBus payload, the > > > > > concept actually matches one to one. > > > > > > > > I see the advantages. The only question I have: What if we encounter > > > > devices in the future which do put data in the payload? Can this > > > > mechanism be extended to handle that? > > > > > > I guess I haven't convinced you with my answer. Is there anything I can > > > do to get this series in v4.10 or do you prefer waiting for v4.11? > > > > I consider this v4.10 material. I was thinking a little about how to not > > lose data with consecutive interrupts but then -EBUSY came along. > > Nonetheless, it looks to me like the proper path to follow... > > Applied to for-next, thanks! Thanks! > > Fixed the following checkpatch warning for you: > > WARNING: struct irq_domain_ops should normally be const > #250: FILE: drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c:1838: > +static struct irq_domain_ops i2c_host_notify_irq_ops = { > Thanks again :) Cheers, Benjamin