Commit 38190dfb authored by Jan Glauber's avatar Jan Glauber Committed by Wolfram Sang

i2c: octeon: thunderx: Remove double-check after interrupt

Commit 1bb1ff3e ("i2c: octeon: Improve performance if interrupt is
early") added a double-check around the wait_event_timeout() condition.
The performance problem that this commit tried to work-around
could not be reproduced. It also makes the wait condition more
complicated then it should be. Therefore remove the double-check.
Signed-off-by: default avatarJan Glauber <jglauber@cavium.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarWolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
parent ccee1a4c
...@@ -36,24 +36,6 @@ static bool octeon_i2c_test_iflg(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) ...@@ -36,24 +36,6 @@ static bool octeon_i2c_test_iflg(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
return (octeon_i2c_ctl_read(i2c) & TWSI_CTL_IFLG); return (octeon_i2c_ctl_read(i2c) & TWSI_CTL_IFLG);
} }
static bool octeon_i2c_test_ready(struct octeon_i2c *i2c, bool *first)
{
if (octeon_i2c_test_iflg(i2c))
return true;
if (*first) {
*first = false;
return false;
}
/*
* IRQ has signaled an event but IFLG hasn't changed.
* Sleep and retry once.
*/
usleep_range(I2C_OCTEON_EVENT_WAIT, 2 * I2C_OCTEON_EVENT_WAIT);
return octeon_i2c_test_iflg(i2c);
}
/** /**
* octeon_i2c_wait - wait for the IFLG to be set * octeon_i2c_wait - wait for the IFLG to be set
* @i2c: The struct octeon_i2c * @i2c: The struct octeon_i2c
...@@ -63,7 +45,6 @@ static bool octeon_i2c_test_ready(struct octeon_i2c *i2c, bool *first) ...@@ -63,7 +45,6 @@ static bool octeon_i2c_test_ready(struct octeon_i2c *i2c, bool *first)
static int octeon_i2c_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) static int octeon_i2c_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
{ {
long time_left; long time_left;
bool first = true;
/* /*
* Some chip revisions don't assert the irq in the interrupt * Some chip revisions don't assert the irq in the interrupt
...@@ -80,7 +61,7 @@ static int octeon_i2c_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) ...@@ -80,7 +61,7 @@ static int octeon_i2c_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
} }
i2c->int_enable(i2c); i2c->int_enable(i2c);
time_left = wait_event_timeout(i2c->queue, octeon_i2c_test_ready(i2c, &first), time_left = wait_event_timeout(i2c->queue, octeon_i2c_test_iflg(i2c),
i2c->adap.timeout); i2c->adap.timeout);
i2c->int_disable(i2c); i2c->int_disable(i2c);
...@@ -102,25 +83,6 @@ static bool octeon_i2c_hlc_test_valid(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) ...@@ -102,25 +83,6 @@ static bool octeon_i2c_hlc_test_valid(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
return (__raw_readq(i2c->twsi_base + SW_TWSI(i2c)) & SW_TWSI_V) == 0; return (__raw_readq(i2c->twsi_base + SW_TWSI(i2c)) & SW_TWSI_V) == 0;
} }
static bool octeon_i2c_hlc_test_ready(struct octeon_i2c *i2c, bool *first)
{
/* check if valid bit is cleared */
if (octeon_i2c_hlc_test_valid(i2c))
return true;
if (*first) {
*first = false;
return false;
}
/*
* IRQ has signaled an event but valid bit isn't cleared.
* Sleep and retry once.
*/
usleep_range(I2C_OCTEON_EVENT_WAIT, 2 * I2C_OCTEON_EVENT_WAIT);
return octeon_i2c_hlc_test_valid(i2c);
}
static void octeon_i2c_hlc_int_clear(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) static void octeon_i2c_hlc_int_clear(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
{ {
/* clear ST/TS events, listen for neither */ /* clear ST/TS events, listen for neither */
...@@ -176,7 +138,6 @@ static void octeon_i2c_hlc_disable(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) ...@@ -176,7 +138,6 @@ static void octeon_i2c_hlc_disable(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
*/ */
static int octeon_i2c_hlc_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) static int octeon_i2c_hlc_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
{ {
bool first = true;
int time_left; int time_left;
/* /*
...@@ -195,7 +156,7 @@ static int octeon_i2c_hlc_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c) ...@@ -195,7 +156,7 @@ static int octeon_i2c_hlc_wait(struct octeon_i2c *i2c)
i2c->hlc_int_enable(i2c); i2c->hlc_int_enable(i2c);
time_left = wait_event_timeout(i2c->queue, time_left = wait_event_timeout(i2c->queue,
octeon_i2c_hlc_test_ready(i2c, &first), octeon_i2c_hlc_test_valid(i2c),
i2c->adap.timeout); i2c->adap.timeout);
i2c->hlc_int_disable(i2c); i2c->hlc_int_disable(i2c);
if (!time_left) if (!time_left)
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment