[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c4d31804-48af-30e3-4b4f-4b03dac6addd@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 10:29:26 -0500
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc: alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tiwai@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
jank@...ence.com, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
slawomir.blauciak@...el.com, Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 15/40] soundwire: cadence_master: handle multiple
status reports per Slave
On 8/2/19 7:20 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 25-07-19, 18:40, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> When a Slave reports multiple status in the sticky bits, find the
>> latest configuration from the mirror of the PING frame status and
>> update the status directly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c b/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c
>> index 889fa2cd49ae..25d5c7267c15 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c
>> @@ -643,13 +643,35 @@ static int cdns_update_slave_status(struct sdw_cdns *cdns,
>>
>> /* first check if Slave reported multiple status */
>> if (set_status > 1) {
>> + u32 val;
>> +
>> dev_warn_ratelimited(cdns->dev,
>> - "Slave reported multiple Status: %d\n",
>> - mask);
>> - /*
>> - * TODO: we need to reread the status here by
>> - * issuing a PING cmd
>> - */
>> + "Slave %d reported multiple Status: %d\n",
>> + i, mask);
>> +
>> + /* re-check latest status extracted from PING commands */
>> + val = cdns_readl(cdns, CDNS_MCP_SLAVE_STAT);
>> + val >>= (i * 2);
>> +
>> + switch (val & 0x3) {
>> + case 0:
>
> why not case CDNS_MCP_SLAVE_INTSTAT_NPRESENT:
ok
>
>> + status[i] = SDW_SLAVE_UNATTACHED;
>> + break;
>> + case 1:
>> + status[i] = SDW_SLAVE_ATTACHED;
>> + break;
>> + case 2:
>> + status[i] = SDW_SLAVE_ALERT;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + status[i] = SDW_SLAVE_RESERVED;
>> + break;
>> + }
>
> we have same logic in the code block preceding this, maybe good idea to
> write a helper and use for both
Yes, I am thinking about this. There are multiple cases where we want to
re-check the status and clear some bits, so helpers would be good.
>
> Also IIRC we can have multiple status set right?
Yes, the status bits are sticky and mirror all values reported in PING
frames. I am still working on how to clear those bits, there are cases
where we clear bits and end-up never hearing from that device ever
again. classic edge/level issue I suppose.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists