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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox