From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Guenter Roeck' <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org>,
"jdelvare@suse.com" <jdelvare@suse.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Errant readings on LM81 with T2080 SoC
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 09:25:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1a7d43e6a16c46cdbe63b497b29ac453@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <725c5e51-65df-e17d-e2da-0982efacf2d2@roeck-us.net>
From: Linuxppc-dev Guenter Roeck
> Sent: 11 March 2021 21:35
>
> On 3/11/21 1:17 PM, Chris Packham wrote:
> >
> > On 11/03/21 9:18 pm, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >>> Bummer. What is really weird is that you see clock stretching under
> >>> CPU load. Normally clock stretching is triggered by the device, not
> >>> by the host.
> >> One example: Some hosts need an interrupt per byte to know if they
> >> should send ACK or NACK. If that interrupt is delayed, they stretch the
> >> clock.
> >>
> > It feels like something like that is happening. Looking at the T2080
> > Reference manual there is an interesting timing diagram (Figure 14-2 if
> > someone feels like looking it up). It shows SCL low between the ACK for
> > the address and the data byte. I think if we're delayed in sending the
> > next byte we could violate Ttimeout or Tlow:mext from the SMBUS spec.
> >
>
> I think that really leaves you only two options that I can see:
> Rework the driver to handle critical actions (such as setting TXAK,
> and everything else that might result in clock stretching) in the
> interrupt handler, or rework the driver to handle everything in
> a high priority kernel thread.
I'm not sure a high priority kernel thread will help.
Without CONFIG_PREEMPT (which has its own set of nasties)
a RT process won't be scheduled until the processor it last
ran on does a reschedule.
I don't think a kernel thread will be any different from a
user process running under the RT scheduler.
I'm trying to remember the smbus spec (without remembering the I2C one).
While basically a clock+data bit-bang the slave is allowed to drive
the clock low to extend a cycle.
It may be allowed to do this at any point?
The master can generate the data at almost any rate (below the maximum)
but I don't think it can go down to zero.
But I do remember one of the specs having a timeout.
But I'd have thought the slave should answer the cycle correctly
regardless of any 'random' delays the master adds in.
Unless you are getting away with de-asserting chipselect?
The only implementation I've done is one an FPGA so doesn't have
worry about interrupt latencies.
It doesn't actually support clock stretching; it wasn't in the
code I started from and none of the slaves we need to connect to
ever does it.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-12 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-07 22:52 Errant readings on LM81 with T2080 SoC Chris Packham
2021-03-08 0:31 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-08 2:27 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-08 4:37 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-08 4:59 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-08 20:27 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-08 22:39 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-10 2:19 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-10 5:06 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-10 21:48 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-11 7:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-11 8:18 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-03-11 15:19 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-11 21:17 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-11 21:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-11 23:47 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-12 0:07 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-12 0:19 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-12 9:25 ` David Laight [this message]
2021-03-14 21:26 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-15 9:46 ` David Laight
2021-03-18 5:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-03-18 3:46 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-18 4:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-18 5:39 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-03-08 22:10 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-09 4:36 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-09 5:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2021-03-09 23:35 ` Chris Packham
2021-03-10 3:29 ` Guenter Roeck
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=1a7d43e6a16c46cdbe63b497b29ac453@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=jdelvare@suse.com \
--cc=linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=wsa@kernel.org \
/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).