Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 19 Jun 2023 20:16:47 +0200
From:   =?UTF-8?B?S8O2cnk=?= Maincent <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
To:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>
Cc:     Cai Huoqing <cai.huoqing@linux.dev>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Gustavo Pimentel <Gustavo.Pimentel@synopsys.com>,
        dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
        Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] dmaengine: dw-edma: Add HDMA remote interrupt
 configuration
Message-ID: <20230619201647.7cfe12c9@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
In-Reply-To: <20230618214800.5h4ni43vu2admho5@mobilestation>
References: <20230609081654.330857-1-kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
        <20230609081654.330857-4-kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
        <20230618214800.5h4ni43vu2admho5@mobilestation>
Organization: bootlin
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 00:48:00 +0300
Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com> wrote:

> Seems reasonable especially seeing there is a code with a similar
> semantic in the dw_hdma_v0_core_write_chunk() method.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>
> 
> Just curious whether we really need to have the local IRQs left
> enabled for the remote device setup... The only case I have in mind is
> that it would be useful to signal a remote end-point host of such
> event in some application-specific environment. It sounds exotic but
> still possible.

Thanks for your review.
Yes, we do need to let local IRQs enabled. I have tested to remove them and it
prevent the remote setup to function correctly on my board. Maybe it needs to be
set to know internally when the transfer is done, but it seems weird. I haven't
a full explanation for now.