[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190211102424.5xnzyxvfd2yhf6ui@ninjato>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:24:24 +0100
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...n.ch>
Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@...sgaard.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] i2c:ocores: stop transfer on timeout
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 09:31:18AM +0100, Federico Vaga wrote:
> Detecting a timeout is ok, but we also need to assert a STOP command on
> the bus in order to prevent it from generating interrupts when there are
> no on going transfers.
>
> Example: very long transmission.
>
> 1. ocores_xfer: START a transfer
> 2. ocores_isr : handle byte by byte the transfer
> 3. ocores_xfer: goes in timeout [[bugfix here]]
> 4. ocores_xfer: return to I2C subsystem and to the I2C driver
> 5. I2C driver : it may clean up the i2c_msg memory
> 6. ocores_isr : receives another interrupt (pending bytes to be
> transferred) but the i2c_msg memory is invalid now
>
> So, since the transfer was too long, we have to detect the timeout and
> STOP the transfer.
>
> Another point is that we have a critical region here. When handling the
> timeout condition we may have a running IRQ handler. For this reason I
> introduce a spinlock.
>
> In order to make easier to understan locking I have:
> - added a new function to handle timeout
> - modified the current ocores_process() function in order to be protected
> by the new spinlock
> Like this it is obvious at first sight that this locking serializes
> the execution of ocores_process() and ocores_process_timeout()
>
> Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...n.ch>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
>
Applied to for-next, thanks!
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists