|
From: | Cédric Le Goater |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH maybe-7.2 1/3] hw/i2c: only schedule pending master when bus is idle |
Date: | Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:01:22 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.1 |
On 11/17/22 08:37, Klaus Jensen wrote:
On Nov 17 07:56, Cédric Le Goater wrote:On 11/17/22 07:40, Klaus Jensen wrote:On Nov 16 16:58, Cédric Le Goater wrote:On 11/16/22 09:43, Klaus Jensen wrote:From: Klaus Jensen <k.jensen@samsung.com> It is not given that the current master will release the bus after a transfer ends. Only schedule a pending master if the bus is idle. Fixes: 37fa5ca42623 ("hw/i2c: support multiple masters") Signed-off-by: Klaus Jensen <k.jensen@samsung.com> --- hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c | 2 ++ hw/i2c/core.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- include/hw/i2c/i2c.h | 2 ++ 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c b/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c index c166fd20fa11..1f071a3811f7 100644 --- a/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c +++ b/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c @@ -550,6 +550,8 @@ static void aspeed_i2c_bus_handle_cmd(AspeedI2CBus *bus, uint64_t value) } SHARED_ARRAY_FIELD_DP32(bus->regs, reg_cmd, M_STOP_CMD, 0); aspeed_i2c_set_state(bus, I2CD_IDLE); + + i2c_schedule_pending_master(bus->bus);Shouldn't it be i2c_bus_release() ?The reason for having both i2c_bus_release() and i2c_schedule_pending_master() is that i2c_bus_release() sort of pairs with i2c_bus_master(). They either set or clear the bus->bh member. In the current design, the controller (in this case the Aspeed I2C) is an "implicit" master (it does not have a bottom half driving it), so there is no bus->bh to clear. I should (and will) write some documentation on the asynchronous API.I found the routine names confusing. Thanks for the clarification. Maybe we could do this rename : i2c_bus_release() -> i2c_bus_release_and_clear() i2c_schedule_pending_master() -> i2c_bus_release() and keep i2c_schedule_pending_master() internal the I2C core subsystem.How about renaming i2c_bus_master to i2c_bus_acquire() such that it pairs with i2c_bus_release().
Looks good to me.
And then add an i2c_bus_yield() to be used by the controller? I think we should be able to assert in i2c_bus_yield() that bus->bh is NULL. But I'll take a closer look at that.
I am using your i2c-echo slave device to track regressions in the Aspeed machines. May be we could merge it for tests ? Thanks, C.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |