From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (relay5-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.197]) (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 45C64634EA; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 12:17:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.197 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712060241; cv=none; b=ZM7mTrDmSWXAMsykE8KZMf9xtl0ZZmc/x2EIfgPZUrPmek7Q2hQCL3RP3Z1WN5EfdBfzniSup58AX+FHD5nboY5hSBkar+SWNLeHPJ1OHJwQ19lfFcoXGd+hVhF72P7KxvYrDL45OrLykfKXIqbcQMiUXbGMwoENQzECjFa201E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712060241; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+PJl1XVFLkJu+n5tB+S3CJb6o62Vtp1lY3hBuuDSHnw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=PaWFKUJ7MnXzMOCehdfePE+DoMwFMwz6Gcuy7cn19AeP5SXpaOAUg/eWpq/dA+cbatI9mrfzhnOQKggUG24UtRfYPpIbcxwFJ9cgRk9VrLhrssAIks43JmLkREXp9Edmpdu1NDAPfRVxNOhARGUfrdlN9cDLhTH3l1W/nW2Ey4o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=WpmdsWL3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.197 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="WpmdsWL3" Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A94C01C0007; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 12:17:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1712060231; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=hO0hGxLnoN3ueobt18N0TvoV+EUroS8WDZqsXk16514=; b=WpmdsWL3cfrFq4LiSA1QwbtYoo2QKGBVBJfxOOOMABP7CUfGmHJ+1D44xcKhETphd2l2Ks /wQ/GFxkO5M0/pKKD2fR6DF3V76iSpPEL1p2uysdxTzi2TN1pmo0N99jlcRZUc1a9HE8Rg PLB2LocxPOtjQgtnpeVceWvhp0BfPK/UF4mFsgbA6bTWhHUxWOL/RZKkQSydeVKJy6Vsbf qVUzjrbbfgRiTPnHBjqD7IhNop4mZBnJrEKs59oMJ04HUG+QjMIYldjol0xSVu+Bd/nXII 1wvCdHiUp4qPyRMGL8Vfcvp4NtGOc8JGbzx5nEmWQGJ/x/NU7QyAcdw5KqWTdw== From: Gregory CLEMENT To: Andi Shyti , Sam Edwards Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND v2 RFC 0/5] Enhancements for mv64xxx I2C driver In-Reply-To: References: <65fa7599.5d0a0220.fe5f7.1f9f@mx.google.com> Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 14:17:11 +0200 Message-ID: <87le5w7yd4.fsf@BLaptop.bootlin.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-GND-Sasl: gregory.clement@bootlin.com Hello Andi and Sam, > Hi Gregory, > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 06:44:56PM -0600, Sam Edwards wrote: >> Salutations, Linux I2C team! > > ... > >> In anticipation of that, I am preparing this series comprising five patches to >> improve the functionality and reliability of the I2C adapter enough to support >> this kind of device. I have heavily tested these changes on the Allwinner-style >> mv64xxx core, but not the Marvell-style, and have not been able to test 10-bit >> addressing. I would greatly appreciate if anyone here could test this series, >> especially on non-Allwinner boards and/or boards with 10-bit devices. >> >> I'm a bit skeptical of using I2C_M_NOSTART for this purpose. The driver does >> not (and cannot) support "just any" use of I2C_M_NOSTART, so it may be >> inappropriate to claim the I2C_FUNC_NOSTART capability. On the other hand, I >> searched high and low and couldn't find any use of I2C_M_NOSTART that >> *wouldn't* be supported by this change, so this could very well be exactly what >> clients understand I2C_FUNC_NOSTART to mean. Given that the alternative would >> be inventing a new flag ("I2C_M_READEXTRA"?) and figuring out how to supply >> input bytes and output bytes in the same i2c_msg, I opted for the NOSTART >> route instead. > > any thought on this series? I believe here we might need a bit > more testing on other platforms. Sorry for the lack of answer. However I saw the series, I will have a closer look on it and give you feednacks. Regards, Gregory > > Andi > >> >> I look forward to any feedback, bug reports, test results, questions, concerns, >> commentary, or discussion that you can offer! >> >> Best regards, >> Sam >> >> Sam Edwards (5): >> i2c: mv64xxx: Clear bus errors before transfer >> i2c: mv64xxx: Clean up the private data struct >> i2c: mv64xxx: Refactor FSM >> i2c: mv64xxx: Allow continuing after read >> i2c: mv64xxx: Implement I2C_FUNC_NOSTART