[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49bce4e6-5757-7afe-2173-681305f1be36@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 17:05:16 +0300
From: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: David Zheng <david.zheng@...el.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
jsd@...ihalf.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] i2c: designware: fix idx_write_cnt in read loop
On 5/23/23 19:46, David Zheng wrote:
> With IC_INTR_RX_FULL slave interrupt handler reads data in a loop until
> RX FIFO is empty. When testing with the slave-eeprom, each transaction
> has 2 bytes for address/index and 1 byte for value, the address byte
> can be written as data byte due to dropping STOP condition.
>
> In the test below, the master continuously writes to the slave, first 2
> bytes are index, 3rd byte is value and follow by a STOP condition.
>
> i2c_write: i2c-3 #0 a=04b f=0000 l=3 [00-D1-D1]
> i2c_write: i2c-3 #0 a=04b f=0000 l=3 [00-D2-D2]
> i2c_write: i2c-3 #0 a=04b f=0000 l=3 [00-D3-D3]
>
> Upon receiving STOP condition slave eeprom would reset `idx_write_cnt` so
> next 2 bytes can be treated as buffer index for upcoming transaction.
> Supposedly the slave eeprom buffer would be written as
>
> EEPROM[0x00D1] = 0xD1
> EEPROM[0x00D2] = 0xD2
> EEPROM[0x00D3] = 0xD3
>
> When CPU load is high the slave irq handler may not read fast enough,
> the interrupt status can be seen as 0x204 with both DW_IC_INTR_STOP_DET
> (0x200) and DW_IC_INTR_RX_FULL (0x4) bits. The slave device may see
> the transactions below.
>
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1594 : INTR_STAT=0x4
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1594 : INTR_STAT=0x4
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1594 : INTR_STAT=0x4
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1794 : INTR_STAT=0x204
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x0 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1790 : INTR_STAT=0x200
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1594 : INTR_STAT=0x4
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1594 : INTR_STAT=0x4
> 0x1 STATUS SLAVE_ACTIVITY=0x1 : RAW_INTR_STAT=0x1594 : INTR_STAT=0x4
>
> After `D1` is received, read loop continues to read `00` which is the
> first bype of next index. Since STOP condition is ignored by the loop,
> eeprom buffer index increased to `D2` and `00` is written as value.
>
> So the slave eeprom buffer becomes
>
> EEPROM[0x00D1] = 0xD1
> EEPROM[0x00D2] = 0x00
> EEPROM[0x00D3] = 0xD3
>
> The fix is to use `FIRST_DATA_BYTE` (bit 11) in `IC_DATA_CMD` to split
> the transactions. The first index byte in this case would have bit 11
> set. Check this indication to inject I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_REQUESTED event
> which will reset `idx_write_cnt` in slave eeprom.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Zheng <david.zheng@...el.com>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h | 2 ++
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c | 4 ++++
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h
> index c5d87aae39c6..8b85147bd518 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h
> @@ -123,6 +123,8 @@
> #define DW_IC_COMP_PARAM_1_SPEED_MODE_HIGH (BIT(2) | BIT(3))
> #define DW_IC_COMP_PARAM_1_SPEED_MODE_MASK GENMASK(3, 2)
>
> +#define DW_IC_DATA_CMD_FIRST_DATA_BYTE BIT(11)
> +
Sorry, didn't notice earlier. Could you put this near to
DW_IC_DATA_CMD_DAT define.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists