Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Nov 2016 11:52:48 +0100 | From | Benjamin Tissoires <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] i2c: use an IRQ to report Host Notify events, not alert |
| |
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?
Cheers, Benjamin
> > > > > Benefits are multiple: > > - simpler code and API: the client will just have an IRQ, and > > nothing needs to be added in the adapter beside internally > > enabling it. > > - no more specific workqueue, the threading is handled by IRQ core > > directly (when required) > > - no more races when removing the device (the drivers are already > > required to disable irq on remove) > > - simpler handling for drivers: use plain regular IRQs > > - no more dependency on i2c-smbus for i2c-i801 (and any other adapter) > > - the IRQ domain is created automatically when the adapter exports > > the Host Notify capability > > - the IRQ are assign only if ACPI, OF and the caller did not assign > > one already > > - the domain is automatically destroyed on remove > > - fewer lines of code (minus 20, yeah!) > > > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> > > Thanks for keeping at it! >
| |