From: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: "Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>,
linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org,
"Vernon Mauery" <vernon.mauery@linux.intel.com>,
"OpenBMC Maillist" <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com,
"Cédric Le Goater" <clg@kaod.org>,
"Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"James Feist" <james.feist@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH i2c-next v6] i2c: aspeed: Handle master/slave combined irq events properly
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 13:10:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <da7f4691-7428-3114-32bb-e0171f6c7228@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180912195844.GA6893@roeck-us.net>
On 9/12/2018 12:58 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 09:54:51AM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
>> On 9/11/2018 6:34 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 04:58:44PM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
>>>> On 9/11/2018 4:33 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>>> Looking into the patch, clearing the interrupt status at the end of an
>>>>> interrupt handler is always suspicious and tends to result in race
>>>>> conditions (because additional interrupts may have arrived while handling
>>>>> the existing interrupts, or because interrupt handling itself may trigger
>>>>> another interrupt). With that in mind, the following patch fixes the
>>>>> problem for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Guenter
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
>>>>> index c258c4d9a4c0..c488e6950b7c 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
>>>>> @@ -552,6 +552,8 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>>>> spin_lock(&bus->lock);
>>>>> irq_received = readl(bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>>>>> + /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
>>>>> + writel(irq_received, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>>>>> irq_remaining = irq_received;
>>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
>>>>> @@ -584,8 +586,6 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>>>> "irq handled != irq. expected 0x%08x, but was 0x%08x\n",
>>>>> irq_received, irq_handled);
>>>>> - /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
>>>>> - writel(irq_received, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
>>>>> spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
>>>>> return irq_remaining ? IRQ_NONE : IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My intention of putting the code at the end of interrupt handler was,
>>>> to reduce possibility of combined irq calls which is explained in this
>>>> patch. But YES, I agree with you. It could make a potential race
>>>
>>> Hmm, yes, but that doesn't explain why it would make sense to acknowledge
>>> the interrupt late. The interrupt ack only means "I am going to handle these
>>> interrupts". If additional interrupts arrive while the interrupt handler
>>> is active, those will have to be acknowledged separately.
>>>
>>> Sure, there is a risk that an interrupt arrives while the handler is
>>> running, and that it is handled but not acknowledged. That can happen
>>> with pretty much all interrupt handlers, and there are mitigations to
>>> limit the impact (for example, read the interrupt status register in
>>> a loop until no more interrupts are pending). But acknowledging
>>> an interrupt that was possibly not handled is always bad idea.
>>
>> Well, that's generally right but not always. Sometimes that depends on
>> hardware and Aspeed I2C is the case.
>>
>> This is a description from Aspeed AST2500 datasheet:
>> I2CD10 Interrupt Status Register
>> bit 2 Receive Done Interrupt status
>> S/W needs to clear this status bit to allow next data receiving.
>>
>> It means, driver should hold this bit to prevent transition of hardware
>> state machine until the driver handles received data, so the bit should
>> be cleared at the end of interrupt handler.
>>
> That makes sense. Does that apply to the other status bits as well ?
> Reason for asking is that the current code actually gets stuck
> in transmit, not receive.
>
Only bit 2 has that description in datasheet. Is slave config enabled
for QEMU build? Does that get stuck in master sending or slave
receiving?
Thanks,
Jae
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-12 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-23 22:57 [PATCH i2c-next v6] i2c: aspeed: Handle master/slave combined irq events properly Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-06 17:26 ` Brendan Higgins
2018-09-06 17:32 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-06 18:08 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-09-06 18:33 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-06 18:40 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-09-11 18:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-11 18:45 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-11 20:30 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-11 20:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-11 22:18 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-11 22:53 ` Joel Stanley
2018-09-11 23:33 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-11 23:58 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-12 1:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-12 16:54 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-12 19:58 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-12 20:10 ` Jae Hyun Yoo [this message]
2018-09-12 20:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-12 22:31 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-12 23:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-13 5:45 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-13 13:33 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-13 15:48 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-13 15:57 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-13 16:35 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-14 3:48 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-14 5:38 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-14 13:23 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-09-14 16:52 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-13 5:47 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-13 16:31 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-13 16:51 ` Cédric Le Goater
2018-09-13 17:01 ` Jae Hyun Yoo
2018-09-12 5:57 ` Cédric Le Goater
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=da7f4691-7428-3114-32bb-e0171f6c7228@linux.intel.com \
--to=jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=clg@kaod.org \
--cc=james.feist@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=vernon.mauery@linux.intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).