From: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
To: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
"regressions@lists.linux.dev" <regressions@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: Regression: at24 eeprom writing times out on sama5d3
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2022 15:41:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a32f84e1-33d1-08ea-8912-cf2311532df8@leemhuis.info> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <074b39c5-55fc-2bc1-072d-aef1070e284d@axentia.se>
[TLDR: I'm adding this regression report to the list of tracked
regressions; all text from me you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already already in similar form.]
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
On 09.06.22 16:28, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Hi!
>
> 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.
To be sure below issue doesn't fall through the cracks unnoticed, I'm
adding it to regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot:
#regzbot ^introduced a4bd8da893a3
#regzbot title i2c: at24 eeprom writing times out on sama5d3
#regzbot ignore-activity
#regzbot monitor:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210727111554.1338832-1-codrin.ciubotariu@microchip.com/
This isn't a regression? This issue or a fix for it are already
discussed somewhere else? It was fixed already? You want to clarify when
the regression started to happen? Or point out I got the title or
something else totally wrong? Then just reply -- ideally with also
telling regzbot about it, as explained here:
https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/tracked-regression/
Reminder for developers: When fixing the issue, add 'Link:' tags
pointing to the report (the mail this one replied to), as the kernel's
documentation call for; above page explains why this is important for
tracked regressions.
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I deal with a lot of
reports and sometimes miss something important when writing mails like
this. If that's the case here, don't hesitate to tell me in a public
reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight.
> 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)
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-11 13:41 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
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 [this message]
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=a32f84e1-33d1-08ea-8912-cf2311532df8@leemhuis.info \
--to=regressions@leemhuis.info \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
/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).