Re: [PATCH] i2c: rk3x: adjust the LOW divison based on characteristics of SCL

[addy ke <addy.ke-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org>]

Hi, Doug

On 2014/9/26 5:52, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Addy,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> Addy,
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:56 PM, addy ke <addy.ke-TNX95d0MmH7DzftRWevZcw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> In my measurement,all paramter but "Data hold time" are match the characteristics of SCL bus line.
>>> the measured value is 0.928us("data hold time on RK3X"  ~=  "the low period / 2")
>>> but the maximum value described in table is 0.9us
>>>
>>> About "Data hold time", there are described in I2C specification:
>>> - for CBUS compatible masters for I2C-bus deivices
>>> - the maximum data hold time has only be met if the device does not stretch the LOW period of the SCL signal.
>>>
>>> I have tested on RK3288-Pinky board, there are no error.
>>> But I don't known whether this paramter will affect i2c communications.
>>
>> I'll have to spend more time tomorrow to really understand this, but
>> if changing the code to bias towards slightly longer "high" times
>> instead of "low" times helps fix it then that's fine with me.
> 
> So what you're saying is that you're seeing a case where the clock
> goes low and the data is not valid until .928us.  Is this data that is
> being driven by the master or data that is being driven by the slave?
> 
It is driven by the master and will be release at half of LOW period in our IC design.

> Do you know why the data takes so long to be valid?  Maybe you can
> email me some of the waveforms and I can try to help you debug it.
> 
sure, I will email the I2C signal test report table right now.
> 
> In any case it sounds like the the "data hold time" problem is
> unrelated to the clock ratio problem (right?), so maybe you could send
> out patch v2?
> 
Ok, I will send patch v2 today.
thanks.

> -Doug
> 
> P.S. I checked the Rockchip TRM and it claims 400kHz maximum i2c.  I
> think that means you can just remove all of the "fast mode plus" and
> "high speed mode" clock rates from your table.
> 
Ok.
> 
>