From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c: rcar: introduce Gen4 devices
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 11:47:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPhKxsj6VTmIlKUY@shikoro> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdUJnKeLJu4-CuDEFty8oW0p9M-D5mcuDv+fFxo-fHvvaQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2547 bytes --]
Hi Geert,
thank you for the review!
> Note that R-Car Gen4 (incl. R-Car S4) has ICFBSCR bits related to
> Slave Clock Stretch Select (which is not yet supported by the driver).
Thanks for the heads up. I'd need more information about the use case of
these bits. Seperate task.
> According to the Programming Examples in the docs for R-Car Gen3,
> R-Car V3U, S4-8, and V4H, I2C must be reset "at the beginning of
> transmission and reception procedure", so not only for DMA.
Sadly, this is vague. If you look at the example for a combined
write-then-read transfer, then you see that only one reset is done,
i.e.: reset -> write -> rep_start -> read
That would mean that we don't need a reset per read/write message of a
transfer. But a reset per transfer then? I would wonder why because we
could also have a super long transfer with lots of read/write messages
in it. Do we need a reset then inbetween? Or is it really dependant on
the STOP bit being transferred? I guess these are all questions for the
HW team, though.
I was reluctant to add the reset too often because my measurements back
then showed that it costs around 5us every time. Annoying. Maybe I
should take it easy and follow the documentation. But then I am still
not sure if a large transfer with way more than two messages are OK
without reset? I will ask the HW team.
> Also, you didn't the touch the checks in rcar_i2c_cleanup_dma():
...
> and rcar_i2c_master_xfer():
...
>
> Don't these apply to R-Car Gen4? I can't easily find where this quirk
> is documented (perhaps just as a commit in the BSP?), but at least the
> "Usage note for DMA mode of Receive Operation" looks identical for
> R-Car Gen3 and for the various R-Car Gen4 variants.
My memory played a trick on me here. I asked Shimoda-san about this
issue on Gen4. I thought I got an answer that it was fixed, so I left
the code Gen3 only. But he actually never got a reply and I forgot to
ping about it.
The latest documentation has now a "usage note for DMA mode" about it
implying that the issue is still present on Gen4 :(
> BTW, depending on the answers to my questions above, you may want to
> replace the rcar_i2c_type enum by a feature mask...
That might be an option. I need to reshuffle my I2C patches first,
though. I'll send some cleanups first to have them out of the way. Then,
I will respin Gen4 support and take care of the DMA RX issue and the new
reset handling there. Thank you for your input!
All the best,
Wolfram
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-06 9:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-04 13:58 [PATCH 0/3] i2c: rcar: add FastMode+ support Wolfram Sang
2023-09-04 13:58 ` [PATCH 1/3] i2c: rcar: avoid non-standard use of goto Wolfram Sang
2023-09-05 11:30 ` Andi Shyti
2023-09-06 6:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-04 13:58 ` [PATCH 2/3] i2c: rcar: introduce Gen4 devices Wolfram Sang
2023-09-05 11:36 ` Andi Shyti
2023-09-05 14:18 ` Wolfram Sang
2023-09-05 21:21 ` Andi Shyti
2023-09-06 7:56 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-06 9:47 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2023-09-06 20:21 ` Wolfram Sang
2023-09-04 13:58 ` [PATCH 3/3] i2c: rcar: add FastMode+ support Wolfram Sang
2023-09-05 21:37 ` Andi Shyti
2023-09-06 7:10 ` Wolfram Sang
2023-09-06 7:34 ` Andi Shyti
2023-09-07 7:09 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-07 12:11 ` Wolfram Sang
2023-09-06 10:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-06 12:11 ` Wolfram Sang
2023-09-06 12:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-06 13:07 ` 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=ZPhKxsj6VTmIlKUY@shikoro \
--to=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
--cc=andi.shyti@kernel.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.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