From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.168.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7874C3214; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:31:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.168.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709886680; cv=none; b=J7XMoWmgxlQ9OXTr/7MC/n4VDFWgzfjDs25td+L/EJrdUGMObMrS9T6oxlG2NiKKyxM2+r5/bfnBx9WytlMNc3y8gPGSBgRJF/mSFl4mjxUB+at8SZhh94XVfWN3svJ4vRlCxRECMtQFk+IUtAf2FAchqT6aA8I40yt/EDkX3h4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709886680; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+DF9vRiArhUyXhhhb8gcTRYI1HSCO9TwBHB3JFkJRDk=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Tdi6uJoygLVwjiOw/cHQtUliNRFMo6T+Gi3JUcTecrI0dy4ULTDKkij7fM+xATC9YjqL2USd1bSUCQsYs9b6Vu0PK6Z1nZxLSIbYcT3441M+H+NsoFC32n7t7aL4hp7LiV6JVK92ZT9PcEvRHEm1ddSp9p2CDUDdKRtcZUvQlZI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quicinc.com header.i=@quicinc.com header.b=R0Gk5oDx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.168.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quicinc.com header.i=@quicinc.com header.b="R0Gk5oDx" Received: from pps.filterd (m0279865.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.24/8.17.1.24) with ESMTP id 42868sT2006942; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:31:15 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quicinc.com; h= message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references:from :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= qcppdkim1; bh=yIccJuIEDZZJkTHxklIyIAT7gx8dwfNVhqyWMGhbaOU=; b=R0 Gk5oDxvvzonVZ9Xa7t+iNWmMoGGMJ277dApNecQLZQ2FTqbyl7V+uYDWJaGVakAx A3lh1G1RPFhrU8ISsyi+FgPdxJntX2DVXKdUHvv66LvDW6nXRQ7xwbq1keH7qyGD ATGyGzwryNddxbW5icy8Hj284Qe4efb+T4A5NX2kE7wz5+WwWI2nU95itN6aGiBi 6waqWcvzv9orZ2mO3m4MT3vP9Y2ldpFujUpwxG8JCMnxAjypI9ubhxudrlbGWFqI D59Y16TXXfbcx7A45mtgKu/rmN2b88dRfvHRzHrU5pbmS20g8KUMX+uMuZJyhzT6 ZvPj3CxacKFce6z+wcAw== Received: from nasanppmta05.qualcomm.com (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3wqn8n18re-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 08 Mar 2024 08:31:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nasanex01c.na.qualcomm.com (nasanex01c.na.qualcomm.com [10.45.79.139]) by NASANPPMTA05.qualcomm.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTPS id 4288VEOb024189 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:31:14 GMT Received: from [10.216.43.112] (10.80.80.8) by nasanex01c.na.qualcomm.com (10.45.79.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.40; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 00:31:10 -0800 Message-ID: <6bacd2be-14d4-49cc-9c98-7010a5f9f9bc@quicinc.com> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 14:01:07 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: i2c-qcom-geni: Parse Error correctly in i2c GSI mode Content-Language: en-US To: Andi Shyti CC: , , , , , , , , References: <20240307205539.217204-1-quic_msavaliy@quicinc.com> <9dbe987a-fdd1-4bec-b350-5936abf69b1b@quicinc.com> From: Mukesh Kumar Savaliya In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.141.250) To nasanex01c.na.qualcomm.com (10.45.79.139) X-QCInternal: smtphost X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=5800 signatures=585085 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: PFNXOaHvYy00tuIf_lCSNwkrriXsvgFP X-Proofpoint-GUID: PFNXOaHvYy00tuIf_lCSNwkrriXsvgFP X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.272,Aquarius:18.0.1011,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-03-08_06,2024-03-06_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=921 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2402120000 definitions=main-2403080066 On 3/8/2024 12:32 PM, Andi Shyti wrote: > Hi Mukesh, > > ... > >>>> Fixes: d8703554f4de ("i2c: qcom-geni: Add support for GPI DMA") >>> >>> I still don't understand what's the fix here. You are making a >>> generic DMA error to be more specific... where is the bug? What >>> exactly is broken now? >>> >> This is about being particular while reporting specific error. >> Like i mentioned, instead of generic DMA transfer error, it should be >> particular error 1) NACK 2) BUT_PROTO 3)ARB_LOST. >> Ofcourse when data transfer via DMA fails, it can be considered as >> DMA Txfer fail. >> In summary so far driver was considering all failure as txfer failure, >> but i2c has errors which are kind of response/condition on the bus. > > I understand that, but what I need to know is: does the system > crash? does the system act in unexpected way? > > Moving from "you received an error" to "you received a nack" is > not a fix, it's an improvement and it should not have the Fixes > tag. > > Having the Fixes tag decides which path this patch will take to > to reach upstream. It's important because after it gets to > upstream other people will take your patch and backport it older > kernels. > > I want to avoid this extra work when not necessary. > Sure, then i think i should be removing fixes tag. It's not a crash but it's an improvement. That being said, i think don't need to CC stable kernel list and i should remove fixes tag ? >> Sorry if it confusing still, but please let me know if anything required to >> be updated in commit log which can bring clarity. >> >>> Besides, keep in mind, that commits with fixes tags get >>> backported to older kernels (this one dates back to 5.18) and you >>> should also Cc the stable mailing list: >>> >>> Cc: # v5.18+ >> >> Sure, will add into CC. was waiting for reviewed-by tag. > > No need to resend. ok, sure. > > Thanks, > Andi