Message-ID: <CAOAejn1HAU5spQeXmYPH4XH0L5bGuoFgguozwMp=uLKcXDEPEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2017 22:28:20 +0100
From:   "M'boumba Cedric Madianga" <cedric.madianga@...il.com>
To:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] i2c: Add STM32F4 I2C driver

2017-01-12 22:10 GMT+01:00 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 09:58:23PM +0100, M'boumba Cedric Madianga wrote:
>> 2017-01-12 18:49 GMT+01:00 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>:
>> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 02:47:42PM +0100, M'boumba Cedric Madianga wrote:
>> >> 2017-01-12 13:03 GMT+01:00 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>:
>> >> > Hello Cedric,
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:23:12PM +0100, M'boumba Cedric Madianga wrote:
>> >> >> 2017-01-11 16:39 GMT+01:00 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>:
>> >> >> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 02:58:44PM +0100, M'boumba Cedric Madianga wrote:
>> >> >> >> 2017-01-11 9:22 GMT+01:00 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>:
>> >> >> >> > This is surprising. I didn't recheck the manual, but that looks very
>> >> >> >> > uncomfortable.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I agree but this exactly the hardware way of working described in the
>> >> >> >> reference manual.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > IMHO that's a hw bug. This makes it for example impossible to implement
>> >> >> > SMBus block transfers (I think).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This is not correct.
>> >> >> Setting STOP/START bit does not mean the the pulse will be sent right now.
>> >> >> Here we have just to prepare the hardware for the 2 next pulse but the
>> >> >> STOP/START/ACK pulse will be generated at the right time as required
>> >> >> by I2C specification.
>> >> >> So SMBus block transfer will be possible.
>> >> >
>> >> > A block transfer consists of a byte that specifies the count of bytes
>> >> > yet to come. So the device sends for example:
>> >> >
>> >> >         0x01 0xab
>> >> >
>> >> > So when you read the 1 in the first byte it's already too late to set
>> >> > STOP to get it after the 2nd byte.
>> >> >
>> >> > Not sure I got all the required details right, though.
>> >>
>> >> Ok I understand your use case but I always think that the harware manages it.
>> >> If I take the above example, the I2C SMBus block read transaction will
>> >> be as below:
>> >> S Addr Wr [A] Comm [A]
>> >>            S Addr Rd [A] [Count] A [Data1] A [Data2] NA P
>> >>
>> >> The first message is a single byte-transmission so there is no problem.
>> >>
>> >> The second message is a N-byte reception with N = 3
>> >>
>> >> When the I2C controller has finished to send the device address (S
>> >> Addr Rd), the ADDR flag is set and an interrupt is raised.
>> >> In the routine that handles ADDR event, we set ACK bit in order to
>> >> generate ACK pulse as soon as a data byte is received in the shift
>> >> register and then we clear the ADDR flag.
>> >> Please note that the SCL line is stretched low until ADDR flag is cleared.
>> >> So, as far I understand, the device could not sent any data as long as
>> >> the SCL line is stretched low. Right ?
>> >>
>> >> Then, as soon as the SCL line is high, the device could send the first
>> >> data byte (Count).
>> >> When this byte is received in the shift register, an ACK is
>> >> automatically generated as defined during adress match phase and the
>> >> data byte is pushed in DR (data register).
>> >> Then, an interrupt is raised as RXNE (RX not empty) flag is set.
>> >> In the routine that handles RXNE event, as N=3, we just clear all
>> >> buffer interrupts in order to avoid another system preemption due to
>> >> RXNE event but we does not read the data in DR.
>> >
>> > In my example I want to receive a block of length 1, so only two bytes
>> > are read, a 1 (the length) and the data byte (0xab in my example). I
>> > think that as soon as you read the 1 it's already to late to schedule
>> > the NA after the next byte?
>>
>> Not really. This 2-byte reception is also correctly managed.
>> Indeed, in this case, when the controller has sent the device address,
>> the ADDR flag is set and an interrupt is raised.
>> So, as long as the ADDR flag is not cleared, the SCL line is stretched
>> low and the device could not send any data.
>> During this address match phase, for a 2-byte reception, we enable
>> NACK and set POS bit (ACK/NACK position).
>> As POS=1, the NACK will be sent for the next byte which will be
>> received in the shift register instead of the current one.
>> So in this example, the next byte will be the last one.
>> After that, we clear the ADDR flag and the device is allowed to send data.
>
> I didn't follow, but if you are convinced it works that's good. I wonder
> if it simplifies the driver if POS=1 is used and so ACK/NACK can be
> setup later?

Please see below a quote from datasheet that clearly described how to handle
For 2-byte reception:
● Wait until ADDR = 1 (SCL stretched low until the ADDR flag is cleared)
● Set ACK low, set POS high
● Clear ADDR flag
● Wait until BTF = 1 (Data 1 in DR, Data2 in shift register, SCL
stretched low until a data1 is read)
● Set STOP high
● Read data 1 and 2

So we cannot set POS=1 and setup ACK/NACK later as you suggest.

Best regards,

Cedric

Powered by blists - more mailing lists