From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] i2c: omap: ensure writes to dev->buf_len are ordered
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:20:01 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <508BBC59.60504@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210262251020.11258@utopia.booyaka.com>
On Saturday 27 October 2012 04:31 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hi Felipe
>
> just two quick comments
>
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
>> if we allow compiler reorder our writes, we could
>> fall into a situation where dev->buf_len is reset
>> for no apparent reason.
>>
>> This bug was found with a simple script which would
>> transfer data to an i2c client from 1 to 1024 bytes
>> (a simple for loop), when we got to transfer sizes
>> bigger than the fifo size, dev->buf_len was reset
>> to zero before we had an oportunity to handle XDR
>> Interrupt. Because dev->buf_len was zero, we entered
>> omap_i2c_transmit_data() to transfer zero bytes,
>> which would mean we would just silently exit
>> omap_i2c_transmit_data() without actually writing
>> anything to DATA register. That would cause XDR
>> IRQ to trigger forever and we would never transfer
>> the remaining bytes.
>>
>> After adding the memory barrier, we also drop resetting
>> dev->buf_len to zero in omap_i2c_xfer_msg() because
>> both omap_i2c_transmit_data() and omap_i2c_receive_data()
>> will act until dev->buf_len reaches zero, rendering the
>> other write in omap_i2c_xfer_msg() redundant.
>>
>> This patch has been tested with pandaboard for a few
>> iterations of the script mentioned above.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
>> ---
>>
>> This bug has been there forever, but it's quite annoying.
>> I think it deserves being pushed upstream during this -rc
>> cycle, but if Wolfram decides to wait until v3.8, I don't
>> mind.
>>
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
>> index db31eae..1ec4e6e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
>> @@ -521,6 +521,7 @@ static int omap_i2c_xfer_msg(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
>> /* REVISIT: Could the STB bit of I2C_CON be used with probing? */
>> dev->buf = msg->buf;
>> dev->buf_len = msg->len;
>> + wmb();
>>
>> omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CNT_REG, dev->buf_len);
>>
>
> Would suggest moving the wmb() immediately before the point at which the
> interrupt can occur. Looks to me that's when the OMAP_I2C_CON_REG write
> occurs.
>
> Also would suggest adding a comment to clarify what the wmb() is intended
> to do. Maybe something like 'Prevent the compiler from moving earlier
> changes to dev->buf and dev->buf_len after the write to CON_REG. This
> write enables interrupts and those variables are used in the interrupt
> handler'.
>
Another alternative, which I will recommend to just make use of the
read*/wrire* instead __raw versions. The barriers are taken care
already and driver point of view, it is transparent.
-->
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
index db31eae..0cd6365 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
@@ -265,13 +265,13 @@ static const u8 reg_map_ip_v2[] = {
static inline void omap_i2c_write_reg(struct omap_i2c_dev *i2c_dev,
int reg, u16 val)
{
- __raw_writew(val, i2c_dev->base +
+ writew(val, i2c_dev->base +
(i2c_dev->regs[reg] << i2c_dev->reg_shift));
}
static inline u16 omap_i2c_read_reg(struct omap_i2c_dev *i2c_dev, int reg)
{
- return __raw_readw(i2c_dev->base +
+ return readw(i2c_dev->base +
(i2c_dev->regs[reg] << i2c_dev->reg_shift));
}
Patch might be damaged because of copy paste.
Regards
Santosh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-27 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-25 9:00 [PATCH] i2c: omap: ensure writes to dev->buf_len are ordered Felipe Balbi
2012-10-25 9:16 ` Shubhrajyoti Datta
2012-10-25 16:38 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-10-25 18:03 ` Felipe Balbi
2012-10-26 23:01 ` Paul Walmsley
2012-10-27 10:50 ` Santosh Shilimkar [this message]
2012-10-27 15:59 ` Paul Walmsley
2012-10-28 4:11 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-11-01 22:23 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-11-02 8:54 ` Felipe Balbi
2012-11-05 8:04 ` [PATCH v2] " Felipe Balbi
2012-11-14 11:20 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-11-14 14:22 ` [PATCH v3] " Felipe Balbi
2012-11-14 16:46 ` Wolfram Sang
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=508BBC59.60504@ti.com \
--to=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).