linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] dt-binding: i2c: add generic properties for GPIO bus recovery

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 30 Jul 2020 09:00:36 +0000
From:   <Codrin.Ciubotariu@...rochip.com>
To:     <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC:     <wsa@...nel.org>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <Ludovic.Desroches@...rochip.com>, <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>,
        <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, <kamel.bouhara@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] dt-binding: i2c: add generic properties for GPIO
 bus recovery

On 27.07.2020 13:50, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:44:57AM +0000, Codrin.Ciubotariu@...rochip.com wrote:
>> On 24.07.2020 23:52, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 09:39:13PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 11:19:18PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +- pinctrl
>>>>>> + add extra pinctrl to configure SCL/SDA pins to GPIO function for bus
>>>>>> + recovery, call it "gpio" or "recovery" state
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should stick with "gpio" only. That is what at91 and imx have
>>>>> in their bindings. pxa uses "recovery" as a pinctrl state name but I
>>>>> can't find any further use or documentation of that. PXA is not fully
>>>>> converted to the best of my knowledge, so maybe it is no problem for PXA
>>>>> to switch to "gpio", too? We should ask Russell King (cced).
>>>
>>> Fully converted to what?  The generic handling where the i2c core layer
>>> handles everything to do with recovery, including the switch between
>>> modes?
>>>
>>> i2c-pxa _intentionally_ carefully handles the switch between i2c mode and
>>> GPIO mode, and I don't see a generic driver doing that to avoid causing
>>> any additional glitches on the bus.  Given the use case that this recovery
>>> is targetted at, avoiding glitches is very important to keep.
>>
>> Why is it not possbile to handle glitches in a generic way? I guess it
>> depends on the pinctl, but we could treat a worst-case scenario to
>> assure the switch between states is done properly.
> 
> Please look at how i2c-pxa switches between the two, and decide whether
> the generic implementation can do the same.

The handling of glitches from initialization looks generic to me. I see 
that there are specific clear/reset routines that are in the 
(un)prepare_recovery() callbacks, but these callbacks are not replaced 
by the generic i2c recovery and will still be used if given by the 
driver. The only thing the generic recovery does is to switch the pinmux 
state. We can discuss whether we want to change the pinmux state first 
or call the (un)preapre_recovery().
What I had in mind for the generic recovery was to just handle the 
common parts that follow the same bindings, which is getting the gpios 
and changing the pinmux states before recovering.

Best regards,
Codrin

> 
> --
> RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
> FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
>