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;
Date:   Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:28:10 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Jie Deng <jie.deng@intel.com>
Cc:     Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>, wsa@kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel@axis.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: virtio: fix completion handling
Message-ID: <20211021055810.4ivtscmg2rs5dtt4@vireshk-i7>
References: <20211019074647.19061-1-vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
 <20211019074647.19061-3-vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
 <a6cb9ae7-eee3-74aa-87de-a2be3fdc7a76@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a6cb9ae7-eee3-74aa-87de-a2be3fdc7a76@intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

On 21-10-21, 13:55, Jie Deng wrote:
> Can the backend driver control the time point of interrupt injection ? I
> can't think of
> 
> why the backend has to send an early interrupt. This operation should be
> avoided
> 
> in the backend driver if possible. However, this change make sense if early
> interrupt
> 
> can't be avoid.

The backend driver probably won't send an event, but the notification
event, if it comes, shouldn't have side effects like what it currently
have (where we finish the ongoing transfer by calling complete()).

-- 
viresh