From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: "Michał Mirosław" <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl>
Cc: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
Stefan Lengfeld <contact@stefanchrist.eu>,
Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: at91: support atomic write xfer
Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 17:52:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200505155228.GG2468@ninjato> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200322163013.GA25488@qmqm.qmqm.pl>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1682 bytes --]
Hi,
> I don't expect this to be used for much more than a simple write to PMIC
> to kill the power. So this patch is tailor made for exactly this purpose.
Frankly, I don't like it much. The atomic callbacks are supposed to be
drop-in replacements of the non-atomic contexts. There may be a need to
read a PMIC register before writing something. I considered checking in
the core if we can fall back to non-atomic calls if the the atomic ones
return -EOPNOTSUPP, though, but I still don't like the idea. I expect
that people send me minimal versions then which are extended over time
by very personal use cases. Having a proper implementation
once-and-for-all (despite bugfixes) sounds much more maintainable to me.
> Though, if you would go for full support of atomic transfers, then
> I would suggest to hack the non-atomic path to be usable in atomic mode
> instead (some I2C drivers do just that, eg. i2c-tegra).
Yes, that is what I am aiming for.
> BTW, I found this comment in i2c-core.h:
>
> * We only allow atomic transfers for very late communication, e.g. to send
> * the powerdown command to a PMIC. Atomic transfers are a corner case and not
> * for generic use!
>
> I think this covers the idea.
Well, since I implemented the atomic_xfer mechanism, I think I am the
primary authority of what "covers the idea", so I will fix the comment
above :) Note, there is also this comment in the way more user-visible
include/linux/i2c.h:
509 * @master_xfer_atomic: same as @master_xfer. Yet, only using atomic context
510 * so e.g. PMICs can be accessed very late before shutdown. Optional.
All the best,
Wolfram
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-05 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-22 4:33 [PATCH v3] i2c: at91: support atomic write xfer Michał Mirosław
2020-03-22 14:30 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-22 16:30 ` Michał Mirosław
2020-05-05 15:52 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2020-05-05 16:47 ` Michał Mirosław
2020-05-06 17:17 ` Michał Mirosław
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200505155228.GG2468@ninjato \
--to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=contact@stefanchrist.eu \
--cc=digetx@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ludovic.desroches@microchip.com \
--cc=m.felsch@pengutronix.de \
--cc=mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl \
--cc=nicolas.ferre@microchip.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.