lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] platform/chrome: Use proper protocol transfer function
Hi Jon,

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Shawn,
>
> On 26/09/17 16:40, Jon Hunter wrote:
> > On 26/09/17 00:15, Shawn N wrote:
>
> ...
>
> >> From: Shawn Nematbakhsh <shawnn@chromium.org>
> >> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 14:32:38 -0700
> >> Subject: [PATCH] mfd: cros ec: spi: Fix "in progress" error signaling
> >>
> >> For host commands that take a long time to process, cros ec can return
> >> early by signaling a EC_RES_IN_PROGRESS result. The host must then poll
> >> status with EC_CMD_GET_COMMS_STATUS until completion of the command.
> >>
> >> None of the above applies when data link errors are encountered. When
> >> errors such as EC_SPI_PAST_END are encountered during command
> >> transmission, it usually means the command was not received by the EC.
> >> Treating such errors as if they were 'EC_RES_IN_PROGRESS' results is
> >> almost always the wrong decision, and can result in host commands
> >> silently being lost.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Shawn Nematbakhsh <shawnn@chromium.org>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mfd/cros_ec_spi.c | 26 ++++++++++++--------------
> >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_spi.c b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_spi.c
> >> index c9714072e224..d33e3847e11e 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_spi.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_spi.c
> >> @@ -377,6 +377,7 @@ static int cros_ec_pkt_xfer_spi(struct
> >> cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
> >> u8 *ptr;
> >> u8 *rx_buf;
> >> u8 sum;
> >> + u8 rx_byte;
> >> int ret = 0, final_ret;
> >>
> >> len = cros_ec_prepare_tx(ec_dev, ec_msg);
> >> @@ -421,25 +422,22 @@ static int cros_ec_pkt_xfer_spi(struct
> >> cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
> >> if (!ret) {
> >> /* Verify that EC can process command */
> >> for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
> >> - switch (rx_buf[i]) {
> >> - case EC_SPI_PAST_END:
> >> - case EC_SPI_RX_BAD_DATA:
> >> - case EC_SPI_NOT_READY:
> >> - ret = -EAGAIN;
> >> - ec_msg->result = EC_RES_IN_PROGRESS;
> >> - default:
> >> + rx_byte = rx_buf[i];
> >> + if (rx_byte == EC_SPI_PAST_END ||
> >> + rx_byte == EC_SPI_RX_BAD_DATA ||
> >> + rx_byte == EC_SPI_NOT_READY) {
> >> + ret = -EREMOTEIO;
> >> break;
> >> }
> >> - if (ret)
> >> - break;
> >> }
> >> - if (!ret)
> >> - ret = cros_ec_spi_receive_packet(ec_dev,
> >> - ec_msg->insize + sizeof(*response));
> >> - } else {
> >> - dev_err(ec_dev->dev, "spi transfer failed: %d\n", ret);
> >> }
> >>
> >> + if (!ret)
> >> + ret = cros_ec_spi_receive_packet(ec_dev,
> >> + ec_msg->insize + sizeof(*response));
> >> + else
> >> + dev_err(ec_dev->dev, "spi transfer failed: %d\n", ret);
> >> +
> >> final_ret = terminate_request(ec_dev);
> >>
> >> spi_bus_unlock(ec_spi->spi->master);
> >>
> >
> > Thanks! Works for me ...
> >
> > Tested-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
>
> I can't find the formal patch you sent out for the above, but I have not
> seen it picked up yet. I am guess that Lee did not pick it up because
> there was still an open question. Anyhow we may want to circle back with
> Lee on this so that this does get picked up.

The formal patch is here:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/27/707

I will circle back to ensure that it gets picked up.

>
> Cheers
> Jon
>
> --
> nvpublic

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-14 17:00    [W:0.073 / U:4.768 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site