lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] i2c: stub: Add support for SMBus block commands
Hi Jean,

On 07/08/2014 12:54 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 07:23:03 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> SMBus block commands are different to I2C block commands since
>> the returned data is not normally accessible with byte or word
>> commands on other command offsets. Add linked list of 'block'
>> commands to support those commands.
>>
>> Access mechanism is quite simple: Block commands must be written
>> before they can be read. The first write selects the block length.
>> Subsequent writes can be partial. Block read commands always return
>> the number of bytes selected with the first write.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>> ---
>> v2: Make new functionality only available on request via functionality
>> module parameter
>> Add more details about SMBus block mode support to documentation
>> Use correct sizeof() variable in devm_kzalloc
>> Use stub_find_block() only in SMBus block command itself.
>> Store first word of block data in chip->words[].
>> When writing block data and the written data is longer than
>> the first write, bail out with debug message indicating the reason
>> for the error.
>
> Looks good, thanks for the quick update.
>
> Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
>
> Just one thing I have been thinking about while reviewing the updated
> code... You decided to make the first SMBus block write select the
> maximum block length, and you always use that for SMBus block reads.
> However you accept partial writes. The fact that the order in which
> writes are performed has an effect on which writes are accepted is
> somewhat unexpected.
>
> Wouldn't it make more sense to accept all SMBus block writes,
> regardless of the size (as long as it is within the limits of the SMBus
> standard, of course)? Then the only thing left to decide is whether
> SMBus block reads use the maximum size or the size of the most recent
> SMBus block write.
>
> I suspect this would mimic the behavior of real chips better. What do
> you think?
>

Not really sure what the expected behavior is. My original code
accepted all writes and returned the most recent write, including
the most recent write length. I thought this was untypical, and that
it would be more typical for the chip to return a fixed length.
But ultimately I don't really know, and I am fine either way.

Guenter



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-08 22:42    [W:0.160 / U:0.572 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site