[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <815503b2-0124-b42e-be08-1f47e2dd0ee8@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 11:13:14 +0200
From: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Michael.Wu@...ics.com, wsa@...nel.org
Cc: andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
morgan.chang@...ics.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: designware: slave should do WRITE_REQUESTED
before WRITE_RECEIVED
On 11/4/20 12:17 PM, Michael.Wu@...ics.com wrote:
> Hi Wolfram,
>
>>> dev->status can be used to record the current state, especially Designware
>>> I2C controller has no interrupts to identify a write-request. This patch
>>
>> Just double-checking: the designware HW does not raise an interrupt when
>> its own address + RW bit has been received?
>
> Not exactly. There're an interrupt state name "RD_REQ" but no one named
> like "WR_REQ".
>
> For read-request, the slave will get a RD_REQ interrupt.
> For write-request, the slave won't be interrupted until data arrived to
> trigger interrupt "RX_FULL".
>
> I tried to use GPIO to simulate an I2C master. I only sent its own
> address + W bit without any data and then I got only a STOP_DET interrupt.
> If I sent its own address + W bit + one byte data and then I got one
> RX_FULL and a STOP_DET.
>
> It seems the controller doesn't interrupt when RW bit is W, but R does.
> What do you think, Jarkko?
>
Yes, the datasheet has a flowchart for slave mode and it shows for a
write only RX_FULL interrupt followed by read from IC_DATA_CMD to
retrieve received byte. Which I believe won't occur if there is no
incoming data byte and only STOP_DET happens as you have observed. The
flowchart however doesn't include the STOP_DET flow.
Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists