[PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: at91: fix write transfers by clearing pending interrupt first

[PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: at91: fix write transfers by clearing pending interrupt first

[Ludovic Desroches]

From: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>

In some cases a NACK interrupt may be pending in the Status Register (SR)
as a result of a previous transfer. However at91_do_twi_transfer() did not
read the SR to clear pending interruptions before starting a new transfer.
Hence a NACK interrupt rose as soon as it was enabled again at the I2C
controller level, resulting in a wrong sequence of operations and strange
patterns of behaviour on the I2C bus, such as a clock stretch followed by
a restart of the transfer.

This first issue occurred with both DMA and PIO write transfers.

Also when a NACK error was detected during a PIO write transfer, the
interrupt handler used to wrongly start a new transfer by writing into the
Transmit Holding Register (THR). Then the I2C slave was likely to reply
with a second NACK.

This second issue is fixed in atmel_twi_interrupt() by handling the TXRDY
status bit only if both the TXCOMP and NACK status bits are cleared.

Tested with a at24 eeprom on sama5d36ek board running a linux-4.1-at91
kernel image. Adapted to linux-next.

Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 1c758cd..94c087b 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -465,19 +465,57 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
-	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
-	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY)
-		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
-
-	/* catch error flags */
-	dev->transfer_status |= status;
 
+	/*
+	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
+	 * TXCOMP and TXRDY bits all together in the Status Register (SR).
+	 *
+	 * 1 - Handling NACK errors with CPU write transfer.
+	 *
+	 * In such case, we should not write the next byte into the Transmit
+	 * Holding Register (THR) otherwise the I2C controller would start a new
+	 * transfer and the I2C slave is likely to reply by another NACK.
+	 *
+	 * 2 - Handling NACK errors with DMA write transfer.
+	 *
+	 * By setting the TXRDY bit in the SR, the I2C controller also triggers
+	 * the DMA controller to write the next data into the THR. Then the
+	 * result depends on the hardware version of the I2C controller.
+	 *
+	 * 2a - Without support of the Alternative Command mode.
+	 *
+	 * This is the worst case: the DMA controller is triggered to write the
+	 * next data into the THR, hence starting a new transfer: the I2C slave
+	 * is likely to reply by another NACK.
+	 * Concurrently, this interrupt handler is likely to be called to manage
+	 * the first NACK before the I2C controller detects the second NACK and
+	 * sets once again the NACK bit into the SR.
+	 * When handling the first NACK, this interrupt handler disables the I2C
+	 * controller interruptions, especially the NACK interrupt.
+	 * Hence, the NACK bit is pending into the SR. This is why we should
+	 * read the SR to clear all pending interrupts at the beginning of
+	 * at91_do_twi_transfer() before actually starting a new transfer.
+	 *
+	 * 2b - With support of the Alternative Command mode.
+	 *
+	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller also locks the
+	 * THR (and sets the LOCK bit in the SR): even though the DMA controller
+	 * is triggered by the TXRDY bit to write the next data into the THR,
+	 * this data actually won't go on the I2C bus hence a second NACK is not
+	 * generated.
+	 */
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
+	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
+	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
+		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
 
+	/* catch error flags */
+	dev->transfer_status |= status;
+
 	return IRQ_HANDLED;
 }
 
@@ -487,6 +525,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	unsigned long time_left;
 	bool has_unre_flag = dev->pdata->has_unre_flag;
 	bool has_alt_cmd = dev->pdata->has_alt_cmd;
+	unsigned sr;
 
 	/*
 	 * WARNING: the TXCOMP bit in the Status Register is NOT a clear on
@@ -537,6 +576,9 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	reinit_completion(&dev->cmd_complete);
 	dev->transfer_status = 0;
 
+	/* Clear pending interrupts, such as NACK. */
+	sr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
+
 	if (dev->fifo_size) {
 		unsigned fifo_mr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_FMR);
 
@@ -558,7 +600,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR) & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
+		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
 			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
 			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		}
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: at91: fix write transfers by clearing pending interrupt first

[Ludovic Desroches]

From: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>

In some cases a NACK interrupt may be pending in the Status Register (SR)
as a result of a previous transfer. However at91_do_twi_transfer() did not
read the SR to clear pending interruptions before starting a new transfer.
Hence a NACK interrupt rose as soon as it was enabled again at the I2C
controller level, resulting in a wrong sequence of operations and strange
patterns of behaviour on the I2C bus, such as a clock stretch followed by
a restart of the transfer.

This first issue occurred with both DMA and PIO write transfers.

Also when a NACK error was detected during a PIO write transfer, the
interrupt handler used to wrongly start a new transfer by writing into the
Transmit Holding Register (THR). Then the I2C slave was likely to reply
with a second NACK.

This second issue is fixed in atmel_twi_interrupt() by handling the TXRDY
status bit only if both the TXCOMP and NACK status bits are cleared.

Tested with a at24 eeprom on sama5d36ek board running a linux-4.1-at91
kernel image. Adapted to linux-next.

Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 1c758cd..94c087b 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -465,19 +465,57 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
-	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
-	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY)
-		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
-
-	/* catch error flags */
-	dev->transfer_status |= status;
 
+	/*
+	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
+	 * TXCOMP and TXRDY bits all together in the Status Register (SR).
+	 *
+	 * 1 - Handling NACK errors with CPU write transfer.
+	 *
+	 * In such case, we should not write the next byte into the Transmit
+	 * Holding Register (THR) otherwise the I2C controller would start a new
+	 * transfer and the I2C slave is likely to reply by another NACK.
+	 *
+	 * 2 - Handling NACK errors with DMA write transfer.
+	 *
+	 * By setting the TXRDY bit in the SR, the I2C controller also triggers
+	 * the DMA controller to write the next data into the THR. Then the
+	 * result depends on the hardware version of the I2C controller.
+	 *
+	 * 2a - Without support of the Alternative Command mode.
+	 *
+	 * This is the worst case: the DMA controller is triggered to write the
+	 * next data into the THR, hence starting a new transfer: the I2C slave
+	 * is likely to reply by another NACK.
+	 * Concurrently, this interrupt handler is likely to be called to manage
+	 * the first NACK before the I2C controller detects the second NACK and
+	 * sets once again the NACK bit into the SR.
+	 * When handling the first NACK, this interrupt handler disables the I2C
+	 * controller interruptions, especially the NACK interrupt.
+	 * Hence, the NACK bit is pending into the SR. This is why we should
+	 * read the SR to clear all pending interrupts at the beginning of
+	 * at91_do_twi_transfer() before actually starting a new transfer.
+	 *
+	 * 2b - With support of the Alternative Command mode.
+	 *
+	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller also locks the
+	 * THR (and sets the LOCK bit in the SR): even though the DMA controller
+	 * is triggered by the TXRDY bit to write the next data into the THR,
+	 * this data actually won't go on the I2C bus hence a second NACK is not
+	 * generated.
+	 */
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
+	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
+	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
+		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
 
+	/* catch error flags */
+	dev->transfer_status |= status;
+
 	return IRQ_HANDLED;
 }
 
@@ -487,6 +525,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	unsigned long time_left;
 	bool has_unre_flag = dev->pdata->has_unre_flag;
 	bool has_alt_cmd = dev->pdata->has_alt_cmd;
+	unsigned sr;
 
 	/*
 	 * WARNING: the TXCOMP bit in the Status Register is NOT a clear on
@@ -537,6 +576,9 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	reinit_completion(&dev->cmd_complete);
 	dev->transfer_status = 0;
 
+	/* Clear pending interrupts, such as NACK. */
+	sr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
+
 	if (dev->fifo_size) {
 		unsigned fifo_mr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_FMR);
 
@@ -558,7 +600,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR) & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
+		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
 			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
 			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		}
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: at91: fix write transfers by clearing pending interrupt first

[Ludovic Desroches]

From: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>

In some cases a NACK interrupt may be pending in the Status Register (SR)
as a result of a previous transfer. However at91_do_twi_transfer() did not
read the SR to clear pending interruptions before starting a new transfer.
Hence a NACK interrupt rose as soon as it was enabled again at the I2C
controller level, resulting in a wrong sequence of operations and strange
patterns of behaviour on the I2C bus, such as a clock stretch followed by
a restart of the transfer.

This first issue occurred with both DMA and PIO write transfers.

Also when a NACK error was detected during a PIO write transfer, the
interrupt handler used to wrongly start a new transfer by writing into the
Transmit Holding Register (THR). Then the I2C slave was likely to reply
with a second NACK.

This second issue is fixed in atmel_twi_interrupt() by handling the TXRDY
status bit only if both the TXCOMP and NACK status bits are cleared.

Tested with a at24 eeprom on sama5d36ek board running a linux-4.1-at91
kernel image. Adapted to linux-next.

Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #4.1
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 1c758cd..94c087b 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -465,19 +465,57 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
-	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
-	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY)
-		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
-
-	/* catch error flags */
-	dev->transfer_status |= status;
 
+	/*
+	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
+	 * TXCOMP and TXRDY bits all together in the Status Register (SR).
+	 *
+	 * 1 - Handling NACK errors with CPU write transfer.
+	 *
+	 * In such case, we should not write the next byte into the Transmit
+	 * Holding Register (THR) otherwise the I2C controller would start a new
+	 * transfer and the I2C slave is likely to reply by another NACK.
+	 *
+	 * 2 - Handling NACK errors with DMA write transfer.
+	 *
+	 * By setting the TXRDY bit in the SR, the I2C controller also triggers
+	 * the DMA controller to write the next data into the THR. Then the
+	 * result depends on the hardware version of the I2C controller.
+	 *
+	 * 2a - Without support of the Alternative Command mode.
+	 *
+	 * This is the worst case: the DMA controller is triggered to write the
+	 * next data into the THR, hence starting a new transfer: the I2C slave
+	 * is likely to reply by another NACK.
+	 * Concurrently, this interrupt handler is likely to be called to manage
+	 * the first NACK before the I2C controller detects the second NACK and
+	 * sets once again the NACK bit into the SR.
+	 * When handling the first NACK, this interrupt handler disables the I2C
+	 * controller interruptions, especially the NACK interrupt.
+	 * Hence, the NACK bit is pending into the SR. This is why we should
+	 * read the SR to clear all pending interrupts at the beginning of
+	 * at91_do_twi_transfer() before actually starting a new transfer.
+	 *
+	 * 2b - With support of the Alternative Command mode.
+	 *
+	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller also locks the
+	 * THR (and sets the LOCK bit in the SR): even though the DMA controller
+	 * is triggered by the TXRDY bit to write the next data into the THR,
+	 * this data actually won't go on the I2C bus hence a second NACK is not
+	 * generated.
+	 */
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
+	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
+	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
+		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
 
+	/* catch error flags */
+	dev->transfer_status |= status;
+
 	return IRQ_HANDLED;
 }
 
@@ -487,6 +525,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	unsigned long time_left;
 	bool has_unre_flag = dev->pdata->has_unre_flag;
 	bool has_alt_cmd = dev->pdata->has_alt_cmd;
+	unsigned sr;
 
 	/*
 	 * WARNING: the TXCOMP bit in the Status Register is NOT a clear on
@@ -537,6 +576,9 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	reinit_completion(&dev->cmd_complete);
 	dev->transfer_status = 0;
 
+	/* Clear pending interrupts, such as NACK. */
+	sr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
+
 	if (dev->fifo_size) {
 		unsigned fifo_mr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_FMR);
 
@@ -558,7 +600,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR) & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
+		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
 			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
 			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		}
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Ludovic Desroches]

In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
RXRDY flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 94c087b..bac0016 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -347,8 +347,14 @@ error:
 
 static void at91_twi_read_next_byte(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 {
-	if (!dev->buf_len)
+	/*
+	 * If we are in this case, it means there is garbage data in RHR, so
+	 * delete them.
+	 */
+	if (!dev->buf_len) {
+		at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		return;
+	}
 
 	/* 8bit read works with and without FIFO */
 	*dev->buf = readb_relaxed(dev->base + AT91_TWI_RHR);
@@ -465,6 +471,24 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
+	/*
+	 * In reception, the behavior of the twi device (before sama5d2) is
+	 * weird. There is some magic about RXRDY flag! When a data has been
+	 * almost received, the reception of a new one is anticipated if there
+	 * is no stop command to send. That is the reason why ask for sending
+	 * the stop command not on the last data but on the second last one.
+	 *
+	 * Unfortunately, we could still have the RXRDY flag set even if the
+	 * transfer is done and we have read the last data. It might happen
+	 * when the i2c slave device sends too quickly data after receiving the
+	 * ack from the master. The data has been almost received before having
+	 * the order to send stop. In this case, sending the stop command could
+	 * cause a RXRDY interrupt with a TXCOMP one. It is better to manage
+	 * the RXRDY interrupt first in order to not keep garbage data in the
+	 * Receive Holding Register for the next transfer.
+	 */
+	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 
 	/*
 	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
@@ -507,8 +531,6 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
-	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
 		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
@@ -600,11 +622,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
-			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
-		}
-
 		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
 		if (!has_alt_cmd && dev->buf_len <= 1 &&
 		    !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Ludovic Desroches]

In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
RXRDY flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 94c087b..bac0016 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -347,8 +347,14 @@ error:
 
 static void at91_twi_read_next_byte(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 {
-	if (!dev->buf_len)
+	/*
+	 * If we are in this case, it means there is garbage data in RHR, so
+	 * delete them.
+	 */
+	if (!dev->buf_len) {
+		at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		return;
+	}
 
 	/* 8bit read works with and without FIFO */
 	*dev->buf = readb_relaxed(dev->base + AT91_TWI_RHR);
@@ -465,6 +471,24 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
+	/*
+	 * In reception, the behavior of the twi device (before sama5d2) is
+	 * weird. There is some magic about RXRDY flag! When a data has been
+	 * almost received, the reception of a new one is anticipated if there
+	 * is no stop command to send. That is the reason why ask for sending
+	 * the stop command not on the last data but on the second last one.
+	 *
+	 * Unfortunately, we could still have the RXRDY flag set even if the
+	 * transfer is done and we have read the last data. It might happen
+	 * when the i2c slave device sends too quickly data after receiving the
+	 * ack from the master. The data has been almost received before having
+	 * the order to send stop. In this case, sending the stop command could
+	 * cause a RXRDY interrupt with a TXCOMP one. It is better to manage
+	 * the RXRDY interrupt first in order to not keep garbage data in the
+	 * Receive Holding Register for the next transfer.
+	 */
+	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 
 	/*
 	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
@@ -507,8 +531,6 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
-	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
 		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
@@ -600,11 +622,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
-			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
-		}
-
 		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
 		if (!has_alt_cmd && dev->buf_len <= 1 &&
 		    !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Ludovic Desroches]

In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
RXRDY flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #4.1
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 94c087b..bac0016 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -347,8 +347,14 @@ error:
 
 static void at91_twi_read_next_byte(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 {
-	if (!dev->buf_len)
+	/*
+	 * If we are in this case, it means there is garbage data in RHR, so
+	 * delete them.
+	 */
+	if (!dev->buf_len) {
+		at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		return;
+	}
 
 	/* 8bit read works with and without FIFO */
 	*dev->buf = readb_relaxed(dev->base + AT91_TWI_RHR);
@@ -465,6 +471,24 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
+	/*
+	 * In reception, the behavior of the twi device (before sama5d2) is
+	 * weird. There is some magic about RXRDY flag! When a data has been
+	 * almost received, the reception of a new one is anticipated if there
+	 * is no stop command to send. That is the reason why ask for sending
+	 * the stop command not on the last data but on the second last one.
+	 *
+	 * Unfortunately, we could still have the RXRDY flag set even if the
+	 * transfer is done and we have read the last data. It might happen
+	 * when the i2c slave device sends too quickly data after receiving the
+	 * ack from the master. The data has been almost received before having
+	 * the order to send stop. In this case, sending the stop command could
+	 * cause a RXRDY interrupt with a TXCOMP one. It is better to manage
+	 * the RXRDY interrupt first in order to not keep garbage data in the
+	 * Receive Holding Register for the next transfer.
+	 */
+	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 
 	/*
 	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
@@ -507,8 +531,6 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
-	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
 		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
@@ -600,11 +622,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
-			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
-		}
-
 		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
 		if (!has_alt_cmd && dev->buf_len <= 1 &&
 		    !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
-- 
2.5.0

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: at91: fix write transfers by clearing pending interrupt first

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1746 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:44:03PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> From: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
> 
> In some cases a NACK interrupt may be pending in the Status Register (SR)
> as a result of a previous transfer. However at91_do_twi_transfer() did not
> read the SR to clear pending interruptions before starting a new transfer.
> Hence a NACK interrupt rose as soon as it was enabled again at the I2C
> controller level, resulting in a wrong sequence of operations and strange
> patterns of behaviour on the I2C bus, such as a clock stretch followed by
> a restart of the transfer.
> 
> This first issue occurred with both DMA and PIO write transfers.
> 
> Also when a NACK error was detected during a PIO write transfer, the
> interrupt handler used to wrongly start a new transfer by writing into the
> Transmit Holding Register (THR). Then the I2C slave was likely to reply
> with a second NACK.
> 
> This second issue is fixed in atmel_twi_interrupt() by handling the TXRDY
> status bit only if both the TXCOMP and NACK status bits are cleared.
> 
> Tested with a at24 eeprom on sama5d36ek board running a linux-4.1-at91
> kernel image. Adapted to linux-next.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
> Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA controller")
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1

Applied to for-next, thanks!

I considered for-current, but really want this to sit a little in
for-next to make sure there are no regressions. It will go back via
stable.


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: at91: fix write transfers by clearing pending interrupt first

[Wolfram Sang]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:44:03PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> From: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
> 
> In some cases a NACK interrupt may be pending in the Status Register (SR)
> as a result of a previous transfer. However at91_do_twi_transfer() did not
> read the SR to clear pending interruptions before starting a new transfer.
> Hence a NACK interrupt rose as soon as it was enabled again at the I2C
> controller level, resulting in a wrong sequence of operations and strange
> patterns of behaviour on the I2C bus, such as a clock stretch followed by
> a restart of the transfer.
> 
> This first issue occurred with both DMA and PIO write transfers.
> 
> Also when a NACK error was detected during a PIO write transfer, the
> interrupt handler used to wrongly start a new transfer by writing into the
> Transmit Holding Register (THR). Then the I2C slave was likely to reply
> with a second NACK.
> 
> This second issue is fixed in atmel_twi_interrupt() by handling the TXRDY
> status bit only if both the TXCOMP and NACK status bits are cleared.
> 
> Tested with a at24 eeprom on sama5d36ek board running a linux-4.1-at91
> kernel image. Adapted to linux-next.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@atmel.com>
> Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA controller")
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #4.1

Applied to for-next, thanks!

I considered for-current, but really want this to sit a little in
for-next to make sure there are no regressions. It will go back via
stable.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20151022/9aaaf81d/attachment.sig>

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 987 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:44:04PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
> set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
> messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
> data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
> RXRDY flag.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
> controller")
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1

    SMATCH
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c:602 at91_do_twi_transfer warn: unused return: sr = at91_twi_read()

drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: In function 'at91_do_twi_transfer':
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c:550:11: warning: variable 'sr' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
  unsigned sr;
           ^

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Wolfram Sang]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:44:04PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
> set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
> messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
> data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
> RXRDY flag.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
> controller")
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #4.1

    SMATCH
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c:602 at91_do_twi_transfer warn: unused return: sr = at91_twi_read()

drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: In function 'at91_do_twi_transfer':
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c:550:11: warning: variable 'sr' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
  unsigned sr;
           ^
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20151022/5c9431d1/attachment.sig>

[PATCH v3] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Ludovic Desroches]

In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
RXRDY flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1
---

Changes from v2:
- fix smatch warning: variable 'sr' set but not used

 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 94c087b..10835d1 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -347,8 +347,14 @@ error:
 
 static void at91_twi_read_next_byte(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 {
-	if (!dev->buf_len)
+	/*
+	 * If we are in this case, it means there is garbage data in RHR, so
+	 * delete them.
+	 */
+	if (!dev->buf_len) {
+		at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		return;
+	}
 
 	/* 8bit read works with and without FIFO */
 	*dev->buf = readb_relaxed(dev->base + AT91_TWI_RHR);
@@ -465,6 +471,24 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
+	/*
+	 * In reception, the behavior of the twi device (before sama5d2) is
+	 * weird. There is some magic about RXRDY flag! When a data has been
+	 * almost received, the reception of a new one is anticipated if there
+	 * is no stop command to send. That is the reason why ask for sending
+	 * the stop command not on the last data but on the second last one.
+	 *
+	 * Unfortunately, we could still have the RXRDY flag set even if the
+	 * transfer is done and we have read the last data. It might happen
+	 * when the i2c slave device sends too quickly data after receiving the
+	 * ack from the master. The data has been almost received before having
+	 * the order to send stop. In this case, sending the stop command could
+	 * cause a RXRDY interrupt with a TXCOMP one. It is better to manage
+	 * the RXRDY interrupt first in order to not keep garbage data in the
+	 * Receive Holding Register for the next transfer.
+	 */
+	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 
 	/*
 	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
@@ -507,8 +531,6 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
-	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
 		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
@@ -525,7 +547,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	unsigned long time_left;
 	bool has_unre_flag = dev->pdata->has_unre_flag;
 	bool has_alt_cmd = dev->pdata->has_alt_cmd;
-	unsigned sr;
 
 	/*
 	 * WARNING: the TXCOMP bit in the Status Register is NOT a clear on
@@ -577,7 +598,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	dev->transfer_status = 0;
 
 	/* Clear pending interrupts, such as NACK. */
-	sr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
+	at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
 
 	if (dev->fifo_size) {
 		unsigned fifo_mr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_FMR);
@@ -600,11 +621,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
-			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
-		}
-
 		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
 		if (!has_alt_cmd && dev->buf_len <= 1 &&
 		    !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v3] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Ludovic Desroches]

In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
RXRDY flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1
---

Changes from v2:
- fix smatch warning: variable 'sr' set but not used

 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 94c087b..10835d1 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -347,8 +347,14 @@ error:
 
 static void at91_twi_read_next_byte(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 {
-	if (!dev->buf_len)
+	/*
+	 * If we are in this case, it means there is garbage data in RHR, so
+	 * delete them.
+	 */
+	if (!dev->buf_len) {
+		at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		return;
+	}
 
 	/* 8bit read works with and without FIFO */
 	*dev->buf = readb_relaxed(dev->base + AT91_TWI_RHR);
@@ -465,6 +471,24 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
+	/*
+	 * In reception, the behavior of the twi device (before sama5d2) is
+	 * weird. There is some magic about RXRDY flag! When a data has been
+	 * almost received, the reception of a new one is anticipated if there
+	 * is no stop command to send. That is the reason why ask for sending
+	 * the stop command not on the last data but on the second last one.
+	 *
+	 * Unfortunately, we could still have the RXRDY flag set even if the
+	 * transfer is done and we have read the last data. It might happen
+	 * when the i2c slave device sends too quickly data after receiving the
+	 * ack from the master. The data has been almost received before having
+	 * the order to send stop. In this case, sending the stop command could
+	 * cause a RXRDY interrupt with a TXCOMP one. It is better to manage
+	 * the RXRDY interrupt first in order to not keep garbage data in the
+	 * Receive Holding Register for the next transfer.
+	 */
+	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 
 	/*
 	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
@@ -507,8 +531,6 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
-	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
 		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
@@ -525,7 +547,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	unsigned long time_left;
 	bool has_unre_flag = dev->pdata->has_unre_flag;
 	bool has_alt_cmd = dev->pdata->has_alt_cmd;
-	unsigned sr;
 
 	/*
 	 * WARNING: the TXCOMP bit in the Status Register is NOT a clear on
@@ -577,7 +598,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	dev->transfer_status = 0;
 
 	/* Clear pending interrupts, such as NACK. */
-	sr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
+	at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
 
 	if (dev->fifo_size) {
 		unsigned fifo_mr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_FMR);
@@ -600,11 +621,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
-			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
-		}
-
 		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
 		if (!has_alt_cmd && dev->buf_len <= 1 &&
 		    !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH v3] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Ludovic Desroches]

In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
RXRDY flag.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
controller")
Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #4.1
---

Changes from v2:
- fix smatch warning: variable 'sr' set but not used

 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
index 94c087b..10835d1 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c
@@ -347,8 +347,14 @@ error:
 
 static void at91_twi_read_next_byte(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 {
-	if (!dev->buf_len)
+	/*
+	 * If we are in this case, it means there is garbage data in RHR, so
+	 * delete them.
+	 */
+	if (!dev->buf_len) {
+		at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
 		return;
+	}
 
 	/* 8bit read works with and without FIFO */
 	*dev->buf = readb_relaxed(dev->base + AT91_TWI_RHR);
@@ -465,6 +471,24 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 	if (!irqstatus)
 		return IRQ_NONE;
+	/*
+	 * In reception, the behavior of the twi device (before sama5d2) is
+	 * weird. There is some magic about RXRDY flag! When a data has been
+	 * almost received, the reception of a new one is anticipated if there
+	 * is no stop command to send. That is the reason why ask for sending
+	 * the stop command not on the last data but on the second last one.
+	 *
+	 * Unfortunately, we could still have the RXRDY flag set even if the
+	 * transfer is done and we have read the last data. It might happen
+	 * when the i2c slave device sends too quickly data after receiving the
+	 * ack from the master. The data has been almost received before having
+	 * the order to send stop. In this case, sending the stop command could
+	 * cause a RXRDY interrupt with a TXCOMP one. It is better to manage
+	 * the RXRDY interrupt first in order to not keep garbage data in the
+	 * Receive Holding Register for the next transfer.
+	 */
+	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY)
+		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 
 	/*
 	 * When a NACK condition is detected, the I2C controller sets the NACK,
@@ -507,8 +531,6 @@ static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 	if (irqstatus & (AT91_TWI_TXCOMP | AT91_TWI_NACK)) {
 		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
 		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
-	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
 	} else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
 		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
 	}
@@ -525,7 +547,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	unsigned long time_left;
 	bool has_unre_flag = dev->pdata->has_unre_flag;
 	bool has_alt_cmd = dev->pdata->has_alt_cmd;
-	unsigned sr;
 
 	/*
 	 * WARNING: the TXCOMP bit in the Status Register is NOT a clear on
@@ -577,7 +598,7 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	dev->transfer_status = 0;
 
 	/* Clear pending interrupts, such as NACK. */
-	sr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
+	at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
 
 	if (dev->fifo_size) {
 		unsigned fifo_mr = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_FMR);
@@ -600,11 +621,6 @@ static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
 	} else if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
 		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;
 
-		if (sr & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
-			dev_err(dev->dev, "RXRDY still set!");
-			at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
-		}
-
 		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
 		if (!has_alt_cmd && dev->buf_len <= 1 &&
 		    !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
-- 
2.5.0

Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 702 bytes --]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:38:27AM +0100, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
> set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
> messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
> data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
> RXRDY flag.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
> controller")
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.1

Applied to for-next, thanks!


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[PATCH v3] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

[Wolfram Sang]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:38:27AM +0100, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag
> set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error
> messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage
> data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the
> RXRDY flag.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> Fixes: 93563a6a71bb ("i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA
> controller")
> Reported-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Tested-by: Peter Rosin <peda@lysator.liu.se>
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #4.1

Applied to for-next, thanks!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20151026/4c8e17df/attachment.sig>