From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112C7C4332F for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 15:34:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB23661205 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 15:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236072AbhKIPgs (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2021 10:36:48 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43446 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231176AbhKIPgq (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2021 10:36:46 -0500 Received: from mail-vk1-xa32.google.com (mail-vk1-xa32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FAFAC061764; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 07:34:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vk1-xa32.google.com with SMTP id bc10so10221424vkb.1; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:34:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=IK+u6/EgK2AA6t6FkE6fg8rct/JQF3WdiGV94a58SbU=; b=EUptd+Z/VsUjd3bP7Qy+dAS2x6SgUkUFxnAksPNvMpVOzCjG5aHpQjVeUmS1GqAYDI nyc38vEAzDOc2Zsh7ATUgcoLgYGxYv7smRUdISNZ02K6UQiFUHeaECJXatMXveX079FU ZvixRRDC1RB/rlZcOKpc5tup7Aagv9mp6s7lvk2siKvbrIlYlFcXJyHB1uOd4ri69u7V Oo3yG8EXUh+/XMmyuExfnqdwiyuJncEUKwmsBLhN6UnnO1REGBXxSXaFYnqUaxUWOk3d 87vd8ihRLsH26oIUx6tSXg9M0zipaxPfJ/F158to/2LMglc6/4Urg16RkEpNv1IWU8ve eEMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=IK+u6/EgK2AA6t6FkE6fg8rct/JQF3WdiGV94a58SbU=; b=gifrWUQP+RvehZKGO+7wVJ7bJyMDny6u8zhGam3fl4S9vEzb5lgvbIe16/CScJzZv2 61mY1Mr+wBq1yUUTCqYIDwVyPaIzhjfCc7MVCjlRA3BvhksnXoc5K28CgbhfYbqbD5jP Acf50UfmRrAoK8rQyudb+uq6pdZ8BFA7LSeXhqVWQMxtZjV1bJ+oqlmA73TEyQO6H7kT NpNBgH/8n4cmIFcb+QsSbMFzwT5igULWbuU9u7VhA09IqusdZ/XMLqpXIrnyW27nJhgA 27e0AfsF/W7xpNBkj1EGFjEEbGevrEIKh2UTVcky9fzYgdLp5b4vlxpkZKUsRfQ1z9MZ dnng== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5322TPo1IqJ4UwRy/JEbPcUEPMowKWHfzSzpLcnVWICaqJHN5IfS 2Eeg80c0ExaZndK9cGmHkpM9nQt6UGg5Fd1JMaQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyR2uiq4nLxiaOZepucMiOLZBdF79FbOHDvR+3Cpq8khsxXPL/mJm/fhlmhEBrV9ek+7Tw7LHlleb5MBb9oP0E= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:9803:: with SMTP id a3mr5638054vke.6.1636472036765; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:33:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210715141742.15072-1-andrea.merello@gmail.com> <20211028101840.24632-1-andrea.merello@gmail.com> <20211028101840.24632-10-andrea.merello@gmail.com> <20211028133134.5feed60b@jic23-huawei> In-Reply-To: <20211028133134.5feed60b@jic23-huawei> Reply-To: andrea.merello@gmail.com From: Andrea Merello Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 16:33:44 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [v2 09/10] iio: imu: add BNO055 serdev driver To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-iio , linux-kernel , devicetree , Lars-Peter Clausen , Rob Herring , Andy Shevchenko , Matt Ranostay , Alexandru Ardelean , Jacopo Mondi , Andrea Merello Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Few inline comments. Ok for all the rest. Il giorno gio 28 ott 2021 alle ore 14:27 Jonathan Cameron ha scritto: > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 12:18:39 +0200 > Andrea Merello wrote: > > > This path adds a serdev driver for communicating to a BNO055 IMU via > > serial bus, and it enables the BNO055 core driver to work in this > > scenario. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Merello > > Hi Andrea, > > Some comments inline. Note I'm not that familiar with the serial_dev interface > so would definitely appreciate input from others on that part. > > Jonathan > > --- > > drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Kconfig | 5 + > > drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Makefile | 1 + > > drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_sl.c | 568 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 574 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_sl.c > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Kconfig b/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Kconfig > > index d197310661af..941e43f0368d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Kconfig > > @@ -2,3 +2,8 @@ > > > > config BOSH_BNO055_IIO > > tristate > > + > > +config BOSH_BNO055_SERIAL > > + tristate "Bosh BNO055 attached via serial bus" > > + depends on SERIAL_DEV_BUS > > + select BOSH_BNO055_IIO > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Makefile b/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Makefile > > index c55741d0e96f..7285ade2f4b9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Makefile > > +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/Makefile > > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_BOSH_BNO055_IIO) += bno055.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_BOSH_BNO055_SERIAL) += bno055_sl.o > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_sl.c b/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_sl.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..1d1410fdaa7c > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_sl.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,568 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > +/* > > + * Serial line interface for Bosh BNO055 IMU (via serdev). > > + * This file implements serial communication up to the register read/write > > + * level. > > + * > > + * Copyright (C) 2021 Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia > > + * Electronic Design Laboratory > > + * Written by Andrea Merello > > + * > > + * This driver is besed on > > + * Plantower PMS7003 particulate matter sensor driver > > + * Which is > > + * Copyright (c) Tomasz Duszynski > > + */ > > + > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > + > > +#include "bno055.h" > > + > > +/* > > + * Register writes cmd have the following format > > + * +------+------+-----+-----+----- ... ----+ > > + * | 0xAA | 0xOO | REG | LEN | payload[LEN] | > > + * +------+------+-----+-----+----- ... ----+ > > + * > > + * Register write responses have the following format > > + * +------+----------+ > > + * | 0xEE | ERROCODE | > > + * +------+----------+ > > + * > > + * Register read have the following format > > + * +------+------+-----+-----+ > > + * | 0xAA | 0xO1 | REG | LEN | > > + * +------+------+-----+-----+ > > + * > > + * Successful register read response have the following format > > + * +------+-----+----- ... ----+ > > + * | 0xBB | LEN | payload[LEN] | > > + * +------+-----+----- ... ----+ > > + * > > + * Failed register read response have the following format > > + * +------+--------+ > > + * | 0xEE | ERRCODE| (ERRCODE always > 1) > > + * +------+--------+ > > + * > > + * Error codes are > > + * 01: OK > > + * 02: read/write FAIL > > + * 04: invalid address > > + * 05: write on RO > > + * 06: wrong start byte > > + * 07: bus overrun > > + * 08: len too high > > + * 09: len too low > > + * 10: bus RX byte timeout (timeout is 30mS) > > + * > > + * > > + * **WORKAROUND ALERT** > > + * > > + * Serial communication seems very fragile: the BNO055 buffer seems to overflow > > + * very easy; BNO055 seems able to sink few bytes, then it needs a brief pause. > > + * On the other hand, it is also picky on timeout: if there is a pause > 30mS in > > + * between two bytes then the transaction fails (IMU internal RX FSM resets). > > + * > > + * BMU055 has been seen also failing to process commands in case we send them > > + * too close each other (or if it is somehow busy?) > > + * > > + * One idea would be to split data in chunks, and then wait 1-2mS between > > + * chunks (we hope not to exceed 30mS delay for any reason - which should > > + * be pretty a lot of time for us), and eventually retry in case the BNO055 > > + * gets upset for any reason. This seems to work in avoiding the overflow > > + * errors, but indeed it seems slower than just perform a retry when an overflow > > + * error occur. > > + * In particular I saw these scenarios: > > + * 1) If we send 2 bytes per time, then the IMU never(?) overflows. > > + * 2) If we send 4 bytes per time (i.e. the full header), then the IMU could > > + * overflow, but it seem to sink all 4 bytes, then it returns error. > > + * 3) If we send more than 4 bytes, the IMU could overflow, and I saw it sending > > + * error after 4 bytes are sent; we have troubles in synchronizing again, > > + * because we are still sending data, and the IMU interprets it as the 1st > > + * byte of a new command. > > + * > > + * So, we workaround all this in the following way: > > + * In case of read we don't split the header but we rely on retries; This seems > > + * convenient for data read (where we TX only the hdr). > > + * For TX we split the transmission in 2-bytes chunks so that, we should not > > + * only avoid case 2 (which is still manageable), but we also hopefully avoid > > + * case 3, that would be by far worse. > > + */ > > + > > +/* > > + * Read operation overhead: > > + * 4 bytes req + 2byte resp hdr. > > + * 6 bytes = 60 bit (considering 1start + 1stop bits). > > + * 60/115200 = ~520uS. > > + * > > + * In 520uS we could read back about 34 bytes that means 3 samples, this means > > + * that in case of scattered read in which the gap is 3 samples or less it is > > + * still convenient to go for a burst. > > + * We have to take into account also IMU response time - IMU seems to be often > > + * reasonably quick to respond, but sometimes it seems to be in some "critical > > + * section" in which it delays handling of serial protocol. > > + * By experiment, it seems convenient to burst up to about 5/6-samples-long gap. > > + */ > > + > > +#define BNO055_SL_XFER_BURST_BREAK_THRESHOLD 6 > > + > > +struct bno055_sl_priv { > > + struct serdev_device *serdev; > > + struct completion cmd_complete; > > + enum { > > + CMD_NONE, > > + CMD_READ, > > + CMD_WRITE, > > + } expect_response; > > + int expected_data_len; > > + u8 *response_buf; > > + > > + /** > > + * enum cmd_status - represent the status of a command sent to the HW. > > + * @STATUS_OK: The command executed successfully. > > + * @STATUS_FAIL: The command failed: HW responded with an error. > > + * @STATUS_CRIT: The command failed: the serial communication failed. > > + */ > > + enum { > > + STATUS_OK = 0, > > + STATUS_FAIL = 1, > > + STATUS_CRIT = -1 > > + } cmd_status; > > + struct mutex lock; > > + > > + /* Only accessed in behalf of RX callback context. No lock needed. */ > > would "Only accessed in RX callback context. No lock needed." convey the same meaning? > > > + struct { > > + enum { > > + RX_IDLE, > > + RX_START, > > + RX_DATA > > + } state; > > + int databuf_count; > > + int expected_len; > > + int type; > > + } rx; > > + > > + /* Never accessed in behalf of RX callback context. No lock needed */ > > + bool cmd_stale; > > +}; > > + > > +static int bno055_sl_send_chunk(struct bno055_sl_priv *priv, u8 *data, int len) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + > > + dev_dbg(&priv->serdev->dev, "send (len: %d): %*ph", len, len, data); > > + ret = serdev_device_write(priv->serdev, data, len, > > + msecs_to_jiffies(25)); > > + if (ret < 0) > > + return ret; > > + > > + if (ret < len) > > + return -EIO; > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * Sends a read or write command. > > + * 'data' can be NULL (used in read case). 'len' parameter is always valid; in > > + * case 'data' is non-NULL then it must match 'data' size. > > + */ > > +static int bno055_sl_do_send_cmd(struct bno055_sl_priv *priv, > > + int read, int addr, int len, u8 *data) > > Read is a bool, so give it that type. > > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + int chunk_len; > > + u8 hdr[] = {0xAA, !!read, addr, len}; > > + > > + if (read) { > > + ret = bno055_sl_send_chunk(priv, hdr, 4); > > + } else { > > + ret = bno055_sl_send_chunk(priv, hdr, 2); > > + if (ret) > > + goto fail; > > + > > + usleep_range(2000, 3000); > > + ret = bno055_sl_send_chunk(priv, hdr + 2, 2); > > + } > > + if (ret) > > + goto fail; > > + > > + if (data) { > > I would flip this condition to reduce indent and make it easy to > see we are done in the no 'data' case. Also, does this correspond in > all cases to read? If so I would use that as the variable to check. > > if (!data) > return 0; > > while (len) { > ... > > > > + while (len) { > > + chunk_len = min(len, 2); > > + usleep_range(2000, 3000); > > + ret = bno055_sl_send_chunk(priv, data, chunk_len); > > + if (ret) > > + goto fail; > > + data += chunk_len; > > + len -= chunk_len; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + return 0; > > +fail: > > + /* waiting more than 30mS should clear the BNO055 internal state */ > > + usleep_range(40000, 50000); > > + return ret; > > +} > > + > > +static int bno_sl_send_cmd(struct bno055_sl_priv *priv, > > + int read, int addr, int len, u8 *data) > > Read looks to be a bool to me not an integer. > > > +{ > > + const int retry_max = 5; > > + int retry = retry_max; > > + int ret = 0; > > + > > + /* > > + * In case previous command was interrupted we still neet to wait it to > > + * complete before we can issue new commands > > + */ > > + if (priv->cmd_stale) { > > + ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&priv->cmd_complete, > > + msecs_to_jiffies(100)); > > + if (ret == -ERESTARTSYS) > > + return -ERESTARTSYS; > > + > > + priv->cmd_stale = false; > > + /* if serial protocol broke, bail out */ > > + if (priv->cmd_status == STATUS_CRIT) > > + goto exit; > > return -EIO; > > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * Try to convince the IMU to cooperate.. as explained in the comments > > + * at the top of this file, the IMU could also refuse the command (i.e. > > + * it is not ready yet); retry in this case. > > + */ > > + while (retry--) { > > + mutex_lock(&priv->lock); > > + priv->expect_response = read ? CMD_READ : CMD_WRITE; > > + reinit_completion(&priv->cmd_complete); > > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock); > > + > > + if (retry != (retry_max - 1)) > > + dev_dbg(&priv->serdev->dev, "cmd retry: %d", > > + retry_max - retry); > > + ret = bno055_sl_do_send_cmd(priv, read, addr, len, data); > > + if (ret) > > + continue; > > + > > + ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&priv->cmd_complete, > > + msecs_to_jiffies(100)); > > + if (ret == -ERESTARTSYS) { > > + priv->cmd_stale = true; > > + return -ERESTARTSYS; > > + } else if (!ret) { > > + ret = -ETIMEDOUT; > > return -ETIMEDOUT; > > > + break; > > + } > > + ret = 0; > > + > > + /* > > + * Poll if the IMU returns error (i.e busy), break if the IMU > > + * returns OK or if the serial communication broke > > + */ > > + if (priv->cmd_status <= 0) > I 'think' this is only place we can break out with status set to anything (with > the suggested modifications above) so move the if statements from the error path > here and drop the ret = 0 above. Hum. Looks like it always break here. Probably it's correct but the loop can be reduced just up to the "continue" or something like that. Have to rework this. > > > + break; > > + } > > + > > +exit: > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + if (priv->cmd_status == STATUS_CRIT) > > + return -EIO; > > + if (priv->cmd_status == STATUS_FAIL) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static int bno055_sl_write_reg(void *context, const void *data, size_t count) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + int reg; > > + u8 *write_data = (u8 *)data + 1; > > Given you dereference data as a u8 * in several places, perhaps a local > variable to allow you to do it once. > > > + struct bno055_sl_priv *priv = context; > > + > > + if (count < 2) { > > + dev_err(&priv->serdev->dev, "Invalid write count %zu", count); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + reg = ((u8 *)data)[0]; > > + dev_dbg(&priv->serdev->dev, "wr reg 0x%x = 0x%x", reg, ((u8 *)data)[1]); > > + ret = bno_sl_send_cmd(priv, 0, reg, count - 1, write_data); > > + > > + return ret; > > return bno_sl_send_cmd(...) > > > +} > > + > > +static int bno055_sl_read_reg(void *context, > > + const void *reg, size_t reg_size, > > + void *val, size_t val_size) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + int reg_addr; > > + struct bno055_sl_priv *priv = context; > > + > > + if (val_size > 128) { > > + dev_err(&priv->serdev->dev, "Invalid read valsize %d", > > + val_size); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + reg_addr = ((u8 *)reg)[0]; > > + dev_dbg(&priv->serdev->dev, "rd reg 0x%x (len %d)", reg_addr, val_size); > > + mutex_lock(&priv->lock); > > + priv->expected_data_len = val_size; > > + priv->response_buf = val; > > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock); > > + > > + ret = bno_sl_send_cmd(priv, 1, reg_addr, val_size, NULL); > > + > > + mutex_lock(&priv->lock); > > + priv->response_buf = NULL; > > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock); > > + > > + return ret; > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * Handler for received data; this is called from the reicever callback whenever > > + * it got some packet from the serial bus. The status tell us whether the > > + * packet is valid (i.e. header ok && received payload len consistent wrt the > > + * header). It's now our responsability to check whether this is what we > > + * expected, of whether we got some unexpected, yet valid, packet. > > + */ > > +static void bno055_sl_handle_rx(struct bno055_sl_priv *priv, int status) > > +{ > > + mutex_lock(&priv->lock); > > + switch (priv->expect_response) { > > + case CMD_NONE: > > + dev_warn(&priv->serdev->dev, "received unexpected, yet valid, data from sensor"); > > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock); > > + return; > > + > > + case CMD_READ: > > + priv->cmd_status = status; > > + if (status == STATUS_OK && > > + priv->rx.databuf_count != priv->expected_data_len) { > > + /* > > + * If we got here, then the lower layer serial protocol > > + * seems consistent with itself; if we got an unexpected > > + * amount of data then signal it as a non critical error > > + */ > > + priv->cmd_status = STATUS_FAIL; > > + dev_warn(&priv->serdev->dev, "received an unexpected amount of, yet valid, data from sensor"); > > + } > > + break; > > + > > + case CMD_WRITE: > > + priv->cmd_status = status; > > + break; > > + } > > + > > + priv->expect_response = CMD_NONE; > > + complete(&priv->cmd_complete); > > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock); > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * Serdev receiver FSM. This tracks the serial communication and parse the > > + * header. It pushes packets to bno055_sl_handle_rx(), eventually communicating > > + * failures (i.e. malformed packets). > > + * Ideally it doesn't know anything about upper layer (i.e. if this is the > > + * packet we were really expecting), but since we copies the payload into the > > + * receiver buffer (that is not valid when i.e. we don't expect data), we > > + * snoop a bit in the upper layer.. > > + * Also, we assume to RX one pkt per time (i.e. the HW doesn't send anything > > + * unless we require to AND we don't queue more than one request per time). > > + */ > > +static int bno055_sl_receive_buf(struct serdev_device *serdev, > > + const unsigned char *buf, size_t size) > > +{ > > + int status; > > + struct bno055_sl_priv *priv = serdev_device_get_drvdata(serdev); > > + int _size = size; > > Why the local variable? size variable gets modified, so we cache the value to return in case of success. > > + > > + if (size == 0) > > + return 0; > > + > > + dev_dbg(&priv->serdev->dev, "recv (len %zu): %*ph ", size, size, buf); > > + switch (priv->rx.state) { > > + case RX_IDLE: > > + /* > > + * New packet. > > + * Check for its 1st byte, that identifies the pkt type. > > + */ > > + if (buf[0] != 0xEE && buf[0] != 0xBB) { > > + dev_err(&priv->serdev->dev, > > + "Invalid packet start %x", buf[0]); > > + bno055_sl_handle_rx(priv, STATUS_CRIT); > > + break; > > + } > > + priv->rx.type = buf[0]; > > + priv->rx.state = RX_START; > > + size--; > > + buf++; > > + priv->rx.databuf_count = 0; > > + fallthrough; > > + > > + case RX_START: > > + /* > > + * Packet RX in progress, we expect either 1-byte len or 1-byte > > + * status depending by the packet type. > > + */ > > + if (size == 0) > > + break; > > + > > + if (priv->rx.type == 0xEE) { > > + if (size > 1) { > > + dev_err(&priv->serdev->dev, "EE pkt. Extra data received"); > > + status = STATUS_CRIT; > > + > > + } else { > > + status = (buf[0] == 1) ? STATUS_OK : STATUS_FAIL; > > + } > > + bno055_sl_handle_rx(priv, status); > > + priv->rx.state = RX_IDLE; > > + break; > > + > > + } else { > > + /*priv->rx.type == 0xBB */ > > + priv->rx.state = RX_DATA; > > + priv->rx.expected_len = buf[0]; > > + size--; > > + buf++; > > + } > > + fallthrough; > > + > > + case RX_DATA: > > + /* Header parsed; now receiving packet data payload */ > > + if (size == 0) > > + break; > > + > > + if (priv->rx.databuf_count + size > priv->rx.expected_len) { > > + /* > > + * This is a inconsistency in serial protocol, we lost > > + * sync and we don't know how to handle further data > > + */ > > + dev_err(&priv->serdev->dev, "BB pkt. Extra data received"); > > + bno055_sl_handle_rx(priv, STATUS_CRIT); > > + priv->rx.state = RX_IDLE; > > + break; > > + } > > + > > + mutex_lock(&priv->lock); > > + /* > > + * NULL e.g. when read cmd is stale or when no read cmd is > > + * actually pending. > > + */ > > + if (priv->response_buf && > > + /* > > + * Snoop on the upper layer protocol stuff to make sure not > > + * to write to an invalid memory. Apart for this, let's the > > + * upper layer manage any inconsistency wrt expected data > > + * len (as long as the serial protocol is consistent wrt > > + * itself (i.e. response header is consistent with received > > + * response len. > > + */ > > + (priv->rx.databuf_count + size <= priv->expected_data_len)) > > + memcpy(priv->response_buf + priv->rx.databuf_count, > > + buf, size); > > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock); > > + > > + priv->rx.databuf_count += size; > > + > > + /* > > + * Reached expected len advertised by the IMU for the current > > + * packet. Pass it to the upper layer (for us it is just valid). > > + */ > > + if (priv->rx.databuf_count == priv->rx.expected_len) { > > + bno055_sl_handle_rx(priv, STATUS_OK); > > + priv->rx.state = RX_IDLE; > > + } > > + break; > > + } > > + > > + return _size; > > +} > > + > > +static const struct serdev_device_ops bno055_sl_serdev_ops = { > > + .receive_buf = bno055_sl_receive_buf, > > + .write_wakeup = serdev_device_write_wakeup, > > +}; > > + > > +static struct regmap_bus bno055_sl_regmap_bus = { > > + .write = bno055_sl_write_reg, > > + .read = bno055_sl_read_reg, > > +}; > > + > > +static int bno055_sl_probe(struct serdev_device *serdev) > > +{ > > + struct bno055_sl_priv *priv; > > + struct regmap *regmap; > > + int ret; > > + > > + priv = devm_kzalloc(&serdev->dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!priv) > > + return -ENOMEM; > > + > > + serdev_device_set_drvdata(serdev, priv); > > + priv->serdev = serdev; > > + mutex_init(&priv->lock); > > + init_completion(&priv->cmd_complete); > > + > > + serdev_device_set_client_ops(serdev, &bno055_sl_serdev_ops); > > + ret = devm_serdev_device_open(&serdev->dev, serdev); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + > > + if (serdev_device_set_baudrate(serdev, 115200) != 115200) { > > + dev_err(&serdev->dev, "Cannot set required baud rate"); > > + return -EIO; > > + } > > + > > + ret = serdev_device_set_parity(serdev, SERDEV_PARITY_NONE); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(&serdev->dev, "Cannot set required parity setting"); > > + return ret; > > + } > > + serdev_device_set_flow_control(serdev, false); > > + > > + regmap = devm_regmap_init(&serdev->dev, &bno055_sl_regmap_bus, > > + priv, &bno055_regmap_config); > > + if (IS_ERR(regmap)) { > > + dev_err(&serdev->dev, "Unable to init register map"); > > + return PTR_ERR(regmap); > > + } > > + > > + return bno055_probe(&serdev->dev, regmap, > > + BNO055_SL_XFER_BURST_BREAK_THRESHOLD); > > +} > > + > > +static const struct of_device_id bno055_sl_of_match[] = { > > + { .compatible = "bosch,bno055" }, > > + { } > > +}; > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bno055_sl_of_match); > > + > > +static struct serdev_device_driver bno055_sl_driver = { > > + .driver = { > > + .name = "bno055-sl", > > + .of_match_table = bno055_sl_of_match, > > + }, > > + .probe = bno055_sl_probe, > > +}; > > +module_serdev_device_driver(bno055_sl_driver); > > + > > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Andrea Merello "); > > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Bosch BNO055 serdev interface"); > > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); >