[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZQlnq4pYp9ZCu0Zs@shikoro>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 11:19:39 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT 1/2] i2c: rcar: reset controller is mandatory for
Gen3+
Hi Geert,
> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
Thanks!
> > + priv->flags &= ~ID_P_NO_RXDMA;
> > + ret = rcar_i2c_do_reset(priv);
> > + if (ret)
> > + priv->flags |= ID_P_NO_RXDMA;
>
> This is pre-existing, but if rcar_i2c_do_reset() returns an error,
> that means the I2C block couldn't get out of reset. Are we sure we
> can still do PIO transfers in that case, or should this be considered
> a fatal error?
Makes sense. I will double check what to do here.
> > + ret = reset_control_status(priv->rstc);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
>
> This is a pre-existing check, but do you really need it?
> This condition will be true if the reset is still asserted, which
> could happen due to some glitch, or force-booting into a new kernel
> using kexec. And AFAIUI, that should be resolved by the call to
> rcar_i2c_do_reset() above.
This check is needed to ensure reset_control_status() really works
because we need it in rcar_i2c_do_reset(). From the docs:
"reset_control_status - returns a negative errno if not supported,..."
The code only checks for that, not for the status of the reset line.
All the best,
Wolfram
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists