[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5458AB65.7000500@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 11:33:09 +0100
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To: Dong Aisheng <b29396@...escale.com>
CC: linux-can@...r.kernel.org, wg@...ndegger.com,
varkabhadram@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
socketcan@...tkopp.net, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] can: m_can: workaround for transmit data less than
4 bytes
On 11/04/2014 10:27 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
>>>> It should be possible to change the for loop to go always to 8, or
>>>> simply unroll the loop:
>>>>
>>>> /* errata description goes here */
>>>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(0), *(u32 *)(cf->data + 0));
>>>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(1), *(u32 *)(cf->data + 4));
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, i tried to fix it as follows.
>>>
>>> /* FIXME: we meet an IC issue that we have to write the full 8
>>> * bytes (whatever value for the second word) in Message RAM to
>>> * avoid bit error for transmit data less than 4 bytes
>>> */
>>> if (cf->len <= 4) {
>>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(0),
>>> *(u32 *)(cf->data + 0));
>>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(1),
>>> *(u32 *)(cf->data + 4));
>>> } else {
>>> for (i = 0; i < cf->len; i += 4)
>>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(i / 4),
>>> *(u32 *)(cf->data + i));
>>>
>>> Will update the patch.
>>
>> Both branches of the above if are doing the same thing, I think you can
>> replace the while if ... else ... for with this:
>>
>
> Not the same thing.
> The later one will cover payload up to 64 bytes.
Doh! I'm not used to CAN-FD, yet :) However, I'll apply this fix before
adding the CAN-FD support.
>> /* errata description goes here */
>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(0), *(u32 *)(cf->data + 0));
>> m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(1), *(u32 *)(cf->data + 4));
>>
>> However if writing to DATA(0) and DATA(1) once in the open() function is
>> enough this code should stay as it is.
>
> I tried put them into open() function and the quick test showed it worked.
>
> Do you think it's ok to put things into open() function for this issue
> as follows?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c b/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
> index 065e4f1..ca55988 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
> @@ -901,6 +901,15 @@ static void m_can_chip_config(struct net_device *dev)
> /* set bittiming params */
> m_can_set_bittiming(dev);
>
> + /* We meet an IC issue that we have to write the full 8
At least on the *insert SoC name here*, an issue with the Message RAM
was discovered. Sending CAN frames with dlc less than 4 bytes will lead
to bit errors, when the first 8 bytes of the Message RAM have not been
initialized (i.e. written to). To work around this issue, the first 8
bytes are initialized here.
> + * bytes (whatever value for the second word) in Message RAM to
> + * avoid bit error for transmit data less than 4 bytes at the first
> + * time. By initializing the first 8 bytes of tx buffer before using
> + * it can avoid such issue.
> + */
> + m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(0), 0x0);
> + m_can_fifo_write(priv, 0, M_CAN_FIFO_DATA(1), 0x0);
> +
> m_can_config_endisable(priv, false);
> }
Can you trigger the issue when sending CAN-FD frames with dlc > 8 && dlc
< 64?
Marc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 |
Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists