Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date:   Mon, 18 May 2020 10:31:13 -0700
From:   bbhatt@codeaurora.org
To:     Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, hemantk@codeaurora.org,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bus: mhi: core: Use current ee in intvec handler
In-Reply-To: <713dc189-561d-3c4a-f856-26d006524485@codeaurora.org>
References: <1589509049-14532-1-git-send-email-jhugo@codeaurora.org>
 <aab020af0372b11ff63ba4526aab0fdc@codeaurora.org>
 <713dc189-561d-3c4a-f856-26d006524485@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <9f19fb80d6cb410809efd27d27390709@codeaurora.org>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.9
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2020-05-17 12:38, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 5/15/2020 8:58 PM, bbhatt@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> On 2020-05-14 19:17, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>>> The intvec handler stores the caches ee in a local variable for use 
>>> in
>>> processing the intvec.  It should instead use the current ee which is
>>> read at the beginning of the intvec incase that the intvec is related 
>>> to
>>> an ee change.  Otherwise, the handler might make the wrong decision
>>> based on an incorrect ee.
>>> 
>>> Fixes: 3000f85b8f47 (bus: mhi: core: Add support for basic PM 
>>> operations)
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c 
>>> b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> index 7272a5a..0a41fe5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> @@ -386,8 +386,8 @@ irqreturn_t mhi_intvec_threaded_handler(int
>>> irq_number, void *dev)
>>>      write_lock_irq(&mhi_cntrl->pm_lock);
>>>      if (MHI_REG_ACCESS_VALID(mhi_cntrl->pm_state)) {
>>>          state = mhi_get_mhi_state(mhi_cntrl);
>>> -        ee = mhi_cntrl->ee;
>>>          mhi_cntrl->ee = mhi_get_exec_env(mhi_cntrl);
>>> +        ee = mhi_cntrl->ee;
>>>      }
>>> 
>>>      if (state == MHI_STATE_SYS_ERR) {
>> Hi Jeff,
>> 
>> Let's hold off on this change for now please as we have some good set 
>> of
>> bug fixes and improvements coming in very soon. They're only pending 
>> post
>> to LKML.
> 
> Does that series of changes address the same issue this patch does,
> and are they going to be posted soon (ie this week)?
Yes.