From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80BB4C433DB for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD44564E0A for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:19:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD44564E0A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E00216AB; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:18:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 1E00216AB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1611951541; bh=xtGXN/CoflUkyfaK5NC0m/x9j5Jy+lI2S2ed5cEIojQ=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=hKqWjMw10jW2ONTskEm2Sx6FNpF5SBSqiclfQWWCvcvFtI3kUEG7jdgN1SOvoBQi8 6NBz3SROLvnpv+K867bSOrPW99/6+EVj9Kys8CXZxQvrrXMKGQEhWNXS/8I0XE0oGn iE/FZHhTrsoUaHKOJO3qYa9f6C/EjOAc7epc0J0g= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A20CF804AD; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:17:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 3EC1AF800E9; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:17:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAF59F800E9 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:17:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz DAF59F800E9 IronPort-SDR: QoW0e+pv/ah3JkSiEzUpghJWrDFY+bBCimtTUzaMkOSh/HrbUlkyQGKPkL0R1H73cxG3+mSEre OZDIUQJm21JQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9879"; a="177916018" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,386,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="177916018" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Jan 2021 12:17:08 -0800 IronPort-SDR: qHj/GQWRqrWl8Gv7Xv74XQ/ak345shFCLAWaWQwR7iVGOqIBp79D3eVwJFtmsfEOcS0v47wQ/7 cyoWYq5/CPaA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,386,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="431150003" Received: from kagerrar-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.16.186]) ([10.212.16.186]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Jan 2021 12:17:07 -0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] soundwire: qcom: update register read/write routine To: Srinivas Kandagatla , vkoul@kernel.org References: <20210129173248.5941-1-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <20210129173248.5941-6-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Message-ID: <5c69ed09-60be-2f3d-ed25-f6dbfcb9d62f@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:33:30 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210129173248.5941-6-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: sanyog.r.kale@intel.com, yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" On 1/29/21 11:32 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > In the existing code every soundwire register read and register write > are kinda blocked. Each of these are using a special command id that what does 'kinda blocked' mean? > generates interrupt after it successfully finishes. This is really > overhead, limiting and not really necessary unless we are doing > something special. > > We can simply read/write the fifo that should also give exactly > what we need! This will also allow to read/write registers in > interrupt context, which was not possible with the special > command approach. This is really unclear, sorry. > + if (id != SWR_BROADCAST_CMD_ID) { > + if (id < 14) > + id += 1; > + else > + id = 0; that is really odd. if id=13 (group2) then id becomes 14 (master address). A comment is really needed here. > + if (cmd_id == SWR_BROADCAST_CMD_ID) { > + /* > + * sleep for 10ms for MSM soundwire variant to allow broadcast > + * command to complete. that's also super-odd. There is nothing in SoundWire that makes any difference between a regular and a broadcast command. they all complete in the same time (a frame). > + */ > + ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&swrm->broadcast, (2 * HZ/10)); is this 10ms really or dependent on CONFIG_HZ? > + if (!ret) > + ret = SDW_CMD_IGNORED; > + else > + ret = SDW_CMD_OK; no CMD_FAILED support? > +static int qcom_swrm_cmd_fifo_rd_cmd(struct qcom_swrm_ctrl *swrm, > + u8 dev_addr, u16 reg_addr, > + u32 len, u8 *rval) > +{ > + u32 val; > + u32 retry_attempt = 0; > + u32 cmd_data; > + int ret = SDW_CMD_OK; > + > + mutex_lock(&swrm->io_lock); > + val = swrm_get_packed_reg_val(&swrm->rcmd_id, len, dev_addr, reg_addr); > + > + /* wait for FIFO RD to complete to avoid overflow */ > + usleep_range(100, 105); > + swrm->reg_write(swrm, SWRM_CMD_FIFO_RD_CMD, val); > + /* wait for FIFO RD CMD complete to avoid overflow */ > + usleep_range(250, 255); > + > +retry_read: > + > + swrm->reg_read(swrm, SWRM_CMD_FIFO_RD_FIFO_ADDR, &cmd_data); > + rval[0] = cmd_data & 0xFF; > + > + if ((((cmd_data) & 0xF00) >> 8) != swrm->rcmd_id) { > + if (retry_attempt < MAX_FIFO_RD_FAIL_RETRY) { > + /* wait 500 us before retry on fifo read failure */ > + usleep_range(500, 505); > + if (retry_attempt == (MAX_FIFO_RD_FAIL_RETRY - 1)) { > + swrm->reg_write(swrm, SWRM_CMD_FIFO_CMD, 0x1); > + swrm->reg_write(swrm, SWRM_CMD_FIFO_RD_CMD, val); > + } > + retry_attempt++; > + goto retry_read; > + } else { > + dev_err(swrm->dev, > + "failed to read fifo: reg: 0x%x, \ > + rcmd_id: 0x%x, dev_num: 0x%x, cmd_data: 0x%x\n", > + reg_addr, swrm->rcmd_id, > + dev_addr, cmd_data); > + ret = SDW_CMD_IGNORED; > + } > } the flow seems complicated with multiple tests and goto? Can this be simplified?