lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 6/6] i2c: iproc: handle rx fifo full interrupt
From
Date


On 10/26/2020 8:13 AM, Rayagonda Kokatanur wrote:
> Hi Dhanajay,
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 11:12 PM Ray Jui <ray.jui@broadcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/12/2020 3:03 PM, Dhananjay Phadke wrote:
>>> From: Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@broadcom.com>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2020 23:52:54 +0530, Rayagonda Kokatanur wrote:
>>>> Add code to handle IS_S_RX_FIFO_FULL_SHIFT interrupt to support
>>>> master write request with >= 64 bytes.
>>>>
>>>> Iproc has a slave rx fifo size of 64 bytes.
>>>> Rx fifo full interrupt (IS_S_RX_FIFO_FULL_SHIFT) will be generated
>>>> when RX fifo becomes full. This can happen if master issues write
>>>> request of more than 64 bytes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ARM cores run much faster than I2C bus, why would rx fifo go full when
>>> rx interrupt is enabled and bytes are read out by bus driver isr?
>>> Isn't fifo read pointer updated on these byte reads?
>>
>> Hi Rayagonda,
>>
>> Could you please reply on this question? For transactions > 64 bytes, do
>> we batch until RX FIFO is full before we read out the data?
>
> Sorry I missed this question.
> Yes with current design we are batching 64 bytes for translation > 64 bytes.
>

So we do batch the transfer and read them in one shot, and that's how
the FIFO full interrupt is being utilized for. That sounds okay to me.

Thanks,

Ray

> Best regards,
> Rayagonda
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>> Does controller stretch clock when rx fifo is full (e.g. kernel has
>>> crashed, bus driver isn't draining fifo)?
>>>
[unhandled content-type:application/pkcs7-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-27 02:09    [W:0.082 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site