| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a2b0ccc1-63d5-177d-2b54-d79c65057907@broadcom.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 10:33:42 -0700
From: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
To: Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@...adcom.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Lori Hikichi <lori.hikichi@...adcom.com>,
Icarus Chau <icarus.chau@...adcom.com>,
Shivaraj Shetty <sshetty1@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] i2c: iproc: Add i2c repeated start capability
Hi Wolfram,
On 8/6/19 9:09 PM, Rayagonda Kokatanur wrote:
> From: Lori Hikichi <lori.hikichi@...adcom.com>
>
> Enable handling of i2c repeated start. The current code
> handles a multi msg i2c transfer as separate i2c bus
> transactions. This change will now handle this case
> using the i2c repeated start protocol. The number of msgs
> in a transfer is limited to two, and must be a write
> followed by a read.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lori Hikichi <lori.hikichi@...adcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@...adcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Icarus Chau <icarus.chau@...adcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Shivaraj Shetty <sshetty1@...adcom.com>
> ---
Note this patch has gone through internal review and testing on various
I2C slave devices. It is introduced to work around limitation of our I2C
controller and allows it to work on certain I2C slave devices that are
sensitive and requires repeated start between transactions instead of a
stop.
Given that my name is also on the Signed-off-by since I helped to
rewrite part of the patch, I'm not going to add my Reviewed-by tag here.
Please help to review.
Thanks,
Ray
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-bcm-iproc.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-bcm-iproc.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-bcm-iproc.c
> index d7fd76b..15fedcf 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-bcm-iproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-bcm-iproc.c
> @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@
> #define M_CMD_PROTOCOL_MASK 0xf
> #define M_CMD_PROTOCOL_BLK_WR 0x7
> #define M_CMD_PROTOCOL_BLK_RD 0x8
> +#define M_CMD_PROTOCOL_PROCESS 0xa
> #define M_CMD_PEC_SHIFT 8
> #define M_CMD_RD_CNT_SHIFT 0
> #define M_CMD_RD_CNT_MASK 0xff
> @@ -675,13 +676,20 @@ static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_wait(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_single_msg(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> - struct i2c_msg *msg)
> +/*
> + * If 'process_call' is true, then this is a multi-msg transfer that requires
> + * a repeated start between the messages.
> + * More specifically, it must be a write (reg) followed by a read (data).
> + * The i2c quirks are set to enforce this rule.
> + */
> +static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_internal(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> + struct i2c_msg *msgs, bool process_call)
> {
> int i;
> u8 addr;
> u32 val, tmp, val_intr_en;
> unsigned int tx_bytes;
> + struct i2c_msg *msg = &msgs[0];
>
> /* check if bus is busy */
> if (!!(iproc_i2c_rd_reg(iproc_i2c,
> @@ -707,14 +715,29 @@ static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_single_msg(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> val = msg->buf[i];
>
> /* mark the last byte */
> - if (i == msg->len - 1)
> - val |= BIT(M_TX_WR_STATUS_SHIFT);
> + if (!process_call && (i == msg->len - 1))
> + val |= 1 << M_TX_WR_STATUS_SHIFT;
>
> iproc_i2c_wr_reg(iproc_i2c, M_TX_OFFSET, val);
> }
> iproc_i2c->tx_bytes = tx_bytes;
> }
>
> + /* Process the read message if this is process call */
> + if (process_call) {
> + msg++;
> + iproc_i2c->msg = msg; /* point to second msg */
> +
> + /*
> + * The last byte to be sent out should be a slave
> + * address with read operation
> + */
> + addr = msg->addr << 1 | 1;
> + /* mark it the last byte out */
> + val = addr | (1 << M_TX_WR_STATUS_SHIFT);
> + iproc_i2c_wr_reg(iproc_i2c, M_TX_OFFSET, val);
> + }
> +
> /* mark as incomplete before starting the transaction */
> if (iproc_i2c->irq)
> reinit_completion(&iproc_i2c->done);
> @@ -733,7 +756,7 @@ static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_single_msg(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> * underrun interrupt, which will be triggerred when the TX FIFO is
> * empty. When that happens we can then pump more data into the FIFO
> */
> - if (!(msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) &&
> + if (!process_call && !(msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) &&
> msg->len > iproc_i2c->tx_bytes)
> val_intr_en |= BIT(IE_M_TX_UNDERRUN_SHIFT);
>
> @@ -743,6 +766,8 @@ static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_single_msg(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> */
> val = BIT(M_CMD_START_BUSY_SHIFT);
> if (msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
> + u32 protocol;
> +
> iproc_i2c->rx_bytes = 0;
> if (msg->len > M_RX_FIFO_MAX_THLD_VALUE)
> iproc_i2c->thld_bytes = M_RX_FIFO_THLD_VALUE;
> @@ -758,7 +783,10 @@ static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_single_msg(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> /* enable the RX threshold interrupt */
> val_intr_en |= BIT(IE_M_RX_THLD_SHIFT);
>
> - val |= (M_CMD_PROTOCOL_BLK_RD << M_CMD_PROTOCOL_SHIFT) |
> + protocol = process_call ?
> + M_CMD_PROTOCOL_PROCESS : M_CMD_PROTOCOL_BLK_RD;
> +
> + val |= (protocol << M_CMD_PROTOCOL_SHIFT) |
> (msg->len << M_CMD_RD_CNT_SHIFT);
> } else {
> val |= (M_CMD_PROTOCOL_BLK_WR << M_CMD_PROTOCOL_SHIFT);
> @@ -774,17 +802,31 @@ static int bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adapter,
> struct i2c_msg msgs[], int num)
> {
> struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c = i2c_get_adapdata(adapter);
> - int ret, i;
> + bool process_call = false;
> + int ret;
>
> - /* go through all messages */
> - for (i = 0; i < num; i++) {
> - ret = bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_single_msg(iproc_i2c, &msgs[i]);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_dbg(iproc_i2c->device, "xfer failed\n");
> - return ret;
> + if (num > 2) {
> + dev_err(iproc_i2c->device,
> + "Only support up to 2 messages. Current msg count %d\n",
> + num);
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> +
> + if (num == 2) {
> + /* Repeated start, use process call */
> + process_call = true;
> + if (msgs[1].flags & I2C_M_NOSTART) {
> + dev_err(iproc_i2c->device, "Invalid repeated start\n");
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> }
>
> + ret = bcm_iproc_i2c_xfer_internal(iproc_i2c, msgs, process_call);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_dbg(iproc_i2c->device, "xfer failed\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> return num;
> }
>
> @@ -806,6 +848,8 @@ static uint32_t bcm_iproc_i2c_functionality(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
> };
>
> static struct i2c_adapter_quirks bcm_iproc_i2c_quirks = {
> + .flags = I2C_AQ_COMB_WRITE_THEN_READ,
> + .max_comb_1st_msg_len = M_TX_RX_FIFO_SIZE,
> .max_read_len = M_RX_MAX_READ_LEN,
> };
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists