linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
To: Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com, Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com,
	alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	wsa@kernel.org, kamel.bouhara@bootlin.com
Subject: Re: Regression: at24 eeprom writing times out on sama5d3
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:44:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3503471d-2d5e-572b-39e7-d715a909749d@axentia.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <38dedc92-62a2-7365-6fda-95d6404be749@axentia.se>

Hi again.

2022-06-10 at 22:51, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 2022-06-10 at 09:35, Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com wrote:
>> On 09.06.2022 17:28, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>>>
>>> I have not actually bisected this issue but reverting the effects of
>>> patch a4bd8da893a3 ("ARM: dts: at91: sama5d3: add i2c gpio pinctrl")
>>> makes the problem go away.
>>>
>>> I.e. I need something like this in my dts
>>>
>>> &i2c2 {
>>>          status = "okay";
>>>
>>>          pinctrl-names = "default";
>>>          /delete-property/ pinctrl-1;
>>>          /delete-property/ sda-gpios;
>>>          /delete-property/ scl-gpios;
>>>
>>>          eeprom@50 {
>>>                  compatible = "st,24c64", "atmel,24c64";
>>>                  reg = <0x50>;
>>>                  wp-gpios = <&filter_gpio 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
>>>          };
>>> };
>>>
>>> for multi-page eeprom writes to not time out (a page is 32 bytes on this
>>> eeprom).
>>>
>>> For reference, the current defaults for this SoC/I2C-bus, that I modify,
>>> are:
>>>
>>>          pinctrl-names = "default", "gpio";
>>>          pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_i2c2>;
>>>          pinctrl-1 = <&pinctrl_i2c2_gpio>;
>>>          sda-gpios = <&pioA 18 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
>>>          scl-gpios = <&pioA 19 (GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH | GPIO_OPEN_DRAIN)>;
>>>
>>> I suspect that the underlying reason is that the bus recovery takes
>>> too long and that the at24 eeprom driver gives up prematurely. I doubt
>>> that this is chip specific, but I don't know that.
>>>
>>> I can work around the issue in user space with by writing in 4 byte
>>> chunks, like so
>>>
>>> dd if=source.file of=/sys/bus/i2c/devices/2-0050/eeprom obs=4
>>>
>>> but that is really ugly and gets slow too, about 20 seconds to program
>>> the full 8kB eeprom. With the above in my dts it takes a second or
>>> so (a bit more with dynamic debug active).
>>>
>>>
>>> If I run
>>>
>>> dd if=source.file of=/sys/bus/i2c/devices/2-0050/eeprom
>>>
>>> with a source.file of 8kB and the upstream dts properties in place, I can
>>> collect the following debug output from at24, i2c-core and i2c-at91:
>>>
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@0 --> 0 (-23170)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: Trying i2c bus recovery
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@32 --> -121 (-23169)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@32 --> 0 (-23168)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: Trying i2c bus recovery
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@64 --> -121 (-23168)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@64 --> 0 (-23167)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: Trying i2c bus recovery
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@96 --> -121 (-23167)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: controller timed out
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: Trying i2c bus recovery
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@96 --> -110 (-23155)
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: controller timed out
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: Trying i2c bus recovery
>>> Jun  9 15:56:34 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@96 --> -110 (-23143)
>>>
>>> And then there is no more action. I.e. only a couple of 32 byte pages
>>> are written.
>>>
>>> With the above mentioned dts override in place I instead get this, which is
>>> a lot more sensible:
>>>
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@0 --> 0 (753629)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@32 --> -121 (753629)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@32 --> 0 (753630)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@64 --> -121 (753630)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@64 --> 0 (753631)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@96 --> -121 (753631)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@96 --> 0 (753632)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@128 --> -121 (753632)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@128 --> 0 (753633)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@160 --> -121 (753633)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:53 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@160 --> 0 (753634)
>>> ... snip ...
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@8128 --> -121 (753883)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@8128 --> 0 (753884)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: received nack
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@8160 --> -121 (753884)
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: i2c i2c-2: at91_xfer: processing 1 messages:
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer: write 34 bytes.
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at91_i2c f801c000.i2c: transfer complete
>>> Jun  9 15:48:55 me20 kernel: at24 2-0050: write 32@8160 --> 0 (753885)
>>
>> could you please apply this patch-set [1] and let us know if it 
>> addresses your issue?
>>
>> Thanks and best regards,
>> Codrin
>>
>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-i2c/list/?series=255408
> 
> That series does indeed help! I'll reply with a tested-by etc on the
> first two patches, I can't test patch 3/3 with my sama5d3 board...
> 
> Thank you very much!

Since replying to the actual patches do not work for me, I'm writing here
instead. Sorry about that. As stated above, it /seems/ to work much better
with these patches. But I fooled myself and there is still some remaining
trouble. It is not uncommon that the second (32-byte) page in the eeprom
is not written correctly for whatever reason. I do not know why it's
always the second page that gets corrupted, but this is a bad problem since
the failure is completely silent.

Cheers,
Peter

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-30  7:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-09 14:28 Regression: at24 eeprom writing times out on sama5d3 Peter Rosin
2022-06-10  7:35 ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2022-06-10 20:51   ` Peter Rosin
2022-06-30  7:44     ` Peter Rosin [this message]
2022-09-08 12:06       ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-09-08 13:59         ` Peter Rosin
2022-09-26 13:32           ` Regression: at24 eeprom writing times out on sama5d3 #forregzbot Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-12-15 17:53           ` Regression: at24 eeprom writing times out on sama5d3 Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-12-15 18:50             ` Conor.Dooley
2023-03-15 11:07               ` Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
2022-06-13 14:58   ` Wolfram Sang
2022-06-13 15:43     ` Peter Rosin
2022-06-13 20:06       ` Wolfram Sang
2022-06-14  8:25       ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2022-06-14 13:53         ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2022-06-14 14:25           ` Conor.Dooley
2022-06-15  8:34             ` Codrin.Ciubotariu
2022-06-11 13:41 ` Thorsten Leemhuis

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=3503471d-2d5e-572b-39e7-d715a909749d@axentia.se \
    --to=peda@axentia.se \
    --cc=Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com \
    --cc=Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com \
    --cc=Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com \
    --cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kamel.bouhara@bootlin.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.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).