ack/nack in write operation

ack/nack in write operation

[Michele Da Rold]

Hello everybody,
I'm new to i2c development some don't kill me if my questions are stupid!!

I'm using bitbanging i2c driver for an AT91 devices,
the AT91 is master and I have a slave that reply, during a write, with a 
NAK after last byte.
The i2c specification permit this solution but i2c linux driver no.
(i have see the possibility to set the I2C_M_IGNORE_NAK but ignore all 
NAK and isn't right!)

There is a solution or I have to modify the code?

Thank you
Michele

Re: ack/nack in write operation

[Jean Delvare]

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:52:25 +0200, Michele Da Rold wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> I'm new to i2c development some don't kill me if my questions are stupid!!
> 
> I'm using bitbanging i2c driver for an AT91 devices,
> the AT91 is master and I have a slave that reply, during a write, with a 
> NAK after last byte.
> The i2c specification permit this solution but i2c linux driver no.

Can you please quote the part of the I2C specification which you think
says this? I read it differently (page 10 of I2C 2.1 specification,
section 7.2: Acknowledge):

"Usually, a receiver which has been addressed is obliged to
generate an acknowledge after each byte has been
received, except when the message starts with a CBUS
address."

"If a master-receiver is involved in a transfer, it must signal
the end of data to the slave-transmitter by not generating
an acknowledge on the last byte that was clocked out of
the slave. The slave-transmitter must release the data line
to allow the master to generate a STOP or repeated
START condition."

So, a master-receiver must nack the last byte, but a slave-receiver must
not. So your slave device is misbehaving - or you are actually trying
to write more bytes to it than it can handle.

> (i have see the possibility to set the I2C_M_IGNORE_NAK but ignore all 
> NAK and isn't right!)

This should indeed be avoided unless you really have to use it.

> There is a solution or I have to modify the code?

First ensure that you are sending the right number of bytes to the
device, with the correct sequence. If you think you're really doing the
right think, get in touch with the vendor of the slave device and ask
them why their device misbehaves.

-- 
Jean Delvare

Re: ack/nack in write operation

[Michele Da Rold]

Il 14/07/2011 18:26, Jean Delvare ha scritto:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:52:25 +0200, Michele Da Rold wrote:
>> Hello everybody,
>> I'm new to i2c development some don't kill me if my questions are stupid!!
>>
>> I'm using bitbanging i2c driver for an AT91 devices,
>> the AT91 is master and I have a slave that reply, during a write, with a
>> NAK after last byte.
>> The i2c specification permit this solution but i2c linux driver no.
>
> Can you please quote the part of the I2C specification which you think
> says this? I read it differently (page 10 of I2C 2.1 specification,
> section 7.2: Acknowledge):
>
> "Usually, a receiver which has been addressed is obliged to
> generate an acknowledge after each byte has been
> received, except when the message starts with a CBUS
> address."
>
> "If a master-receiver is involved in a transfer, it must signal
> the end of data to the slave-transmitter by not generating
> an acknowledge on the last byte that was clocked out of
> the slave. The slave-transmitter must release the data line
> to allow the master to generate a STOP or repeated
> START condition."
>
> So, a master-receiver must nack the last byte, but a slave-receiver must
> not. So your slave device is misbehaving - or you are actually trying
> to write more bytes to it than it can handle.
>

Refer to fig.11 of specification 2.1.
But I think that I was wrong. I agree with your opinion.

>> (i have see the possibility to set the I2C_M_IGNORE_NAK but ignore all
>> NAK and isn't right!)
>
> This should indeed be avoided unless you really have to use it.
>
>> There is a solution or I have to modify the code?
>
> First ensure that you are sending the right number of bytes to the
> device, with the correct sequence. If you think you're really doing the
> right think, get in touch with the vendor of the slave device and ask
> them why their device misbehaves.
>

I'm in touch with vendor, I'm waiting for his reply.

Thank you
Michele

Re: ack/nack in write operation

[Michele Da Rold]

Vendor resolve the problem.

Thank you for your help

Michele

Il 15/07/2011 10:03, Michele Da Rold ha scritto:
> Il 14/07/2011 18:26, Jean Delvare ha scritto:
>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:52:25 +0200, Michele Da Rold wrote:
>>> Hello everybody,
>>> I'm new to i2c development some don't kill me if my questions are
>>> stupid!!
>>>
>>> I'm using bitbanging i2c driver for an AT91 devices,
>>> the AT91 is master and I have a slave that reply, during a write, with a
>>> NAK after last byte.
>>> The i2c specification permit this solution but i2c linux driver no.
>>
>> Can you please quote the part of the I2C specification which you think
>> says this? I read it differently (page 10 of I2C 2.1 specification,
>> section 7.2: Acknowledge):
>>
>> "Usually, a receiver which has been addressed is obliged to
>> generate an acknowledge after each byte has been
>> received, except when the message starts with a CBUS
>> address."
>>
>> "If a master-receiver is involved in a transfer, it must signal
>> the end of data to the slave-transmitter by not generating
>> an acknowledge on the last byte that was clocked out of
>> the slave. The slave-transmitter must release the data line
>> to allow the master to generate a STOP or repeated
>> START condition."
>>
>> So, a master-receiver must nack the last byte, but a slave-receiver must
>> not. So your slave device is misbehaving - or you are actually trying
>> to write more bytes to it than it can handle.
>>
>
> Refer to fig.11 of specification 2.1.
> But I think that I was wrong. I agree with your opinion.
>
>>> (i have see the possibility to set the I2C_M_IGNORE_NAK but ignore all
>>> NAK and isn't right!)
>>
>> This should indeed be avoided unless you really have to use it.
>>
>>> There is a solution or I have to modify the code?
>>
>> First ensure that you are sending the right number of bytes to the
>> device, with the correct sequence. If you think you're really doing the
>> right think, get in touch with the vendor of the slave device and ask
>> them why their device misbehaves.
>>
>
> I'm in touch with vendor, I'm waiting for his reply.
>
> Thank you
> Michele
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


-- 
Michele Da Rold
ECS s.r.l.
via del Candel - 55/D - 32100 Belluno (Italy)
Tel. +39 0437 33101
Diretto +39 0437 359635
Fax +39 0437 359631
michele.darold[at]ecsproject[dot]com - http://www.ecsproject.com

P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

Avviso di riservatezza
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o 
nei file allegati,
sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è 
consentito esclusivamente
al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio 
stesso.
Qualora riceveste questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi 
preghiamo cortesemente
di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del 
messaggio stesso, cancellandolo
dal Vostro sistema.
Vi ricordiamo che costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi 
dettati dal Dlgs. 196/2003
il trattenere il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, 
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti,
copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse.