[PATCH v2] arm64: dts: amlogic: Make mmc host controller interrupts level-sensitive

[Neil Armstrong]

On 09/02/2023 07:44, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 08.02.2023 13:40, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> Le 27/01/2023 à 14:02, Heiner Kallweit a écrit :
>>> On 27.01.2023 08:59, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 26/01/2023 15:03, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>> The usage of edge-triggered interrupts lead to lost interrupts under load,
>>>>> see [0]. This was confirmed to be fixed by using level-triggered
>>>>> interrupts.
>>>>> The report was about SDIO. However, as the host controller is the same
>>>>> for SD and MMC, apply the change to all mmc controller instances.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, I applied it in for-next so it runs on the CI tests.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [0] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg73991.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 1499218c80c9 ("arm64: dts: move common G12A & G12B modes to meson-g12-common.dtsi")
>>>>
>>>> I think we should find a better Fixes or perhaps split in 3 so it targets the
>>>> right commit adding the nodes for each family.
>>>>
>>> This would be the cleanest option, right. Practically it shouldn't make
>>> much of a difference. The chosen commit is from 2019, SDIO interrupt
>>> support has been added just recently, and regarding MMC/SD it seems no
>>> problems caused by edge-triggered interrupts are known.
>>
>> I understand, but the Fixes tag must reflect what commit introduced the breakage,
>> so either keep a single patch but list all commits introducing the MMC, SD & SDIO nodes
>> on the 3 families, or split in 3 and specify the commit introducing the MMC, SD & SDIO
>> node on each family.
>>
>> I'll prefer the later.
>>
>> If the patch isn't applicable for older kernels, it doesn't matter as the stable team
>> will only apply the fix on a tree if it applies and builds.
>> If you target an older release you can submit them a patch reworked to apply
>> correctly if the original patch is already only Linus master tree.
>>
> Do you need a revert for the current "TEST"-annotated commit in linux-next
> as part of the series?

No need, I'll remove it from for-next.

Neil

> 
>> And don't forget adding the Tested-by tags.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Neil
>>
>>>
>>>> If the test doesn't report any breakage, I'll probably ask you that.
>>>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>> Heiner
>>>
>>
> Heiner
>