Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] i2c: xilinx: Set tx direction in write operation

[Michal Simek]

On 10/04/2013 02:12 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 10/04/2013 01:55 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 11:53:49AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> On 10/04/2013 07:46 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +	cr = xiic_getreg32(i2c, XIIC_CR_REG_OFFSET);
>>>>> +	cr |= XIIC_CR_DIR_IS_TX_MASK;
>>>>> +	xiic_setreg32(i2c, XIIC_CR_REG_OFFSET, cr);
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> Is there no need to clear the bit again when receiving?
>>>
>>> This bit is cleared in xiic_xfer() -> xiic_start_xfer() ->xiic_reinit()
>>>
>>> xiic_setreg8(i2c, XIIC_CR_REG_OFFSET, XIIC_CR_TX_FIFO_RESET_MASK);
>>
>> A bit implicit, but OK.
>>
>>>> And did
>>>> transferring ever work if this bit was never set before?
>>>
>>> I really don't know. We have switched from old driver to this new mainline one
>>> and based on our eeprom testing we have found that this bit hasn't been setup properly.
>>>
>>> It is described here.
>>> http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/ip_documentation/axi_iic/v1_02_a/axi_iic_ds756.pdf
>>> page 28 - step 3.
>>>
>>> IIC Master Transmitter with a Repeated Start
>>> 1. Write the IIC device address to the TX_FIFO.
>>> 2. Write data to TX_FIFO.
>>> 3. Write to Control Register (CR) to set MSMS = 1 and TX = 1.
>>> 4. Continue writing data to TX_FIFO.
>>> 5. Wait for transmit FIFO empty interrupt. This implies the IIC has throttled the bus.
>>> 6. Write to CR to set RSTA = 1.
>>
>> Repeated start is not happening in the driver as well, or am I
>> overlooking something?
>>
>>> 7. Write IIC device address to TX_FIFO.
>>> 8. Write all data except last byte to TX_FIFO.
>>> 9. Wait for transmit FIFO empty interrupt. This implies the IIC has throttled the bus.
>>> 10. Write to CR to set MSMS = 0. The IIC generates a stop condition at the end of the last byte.
>>> 11. Write last byte of data to TX_FIFO.
>>
>> CCing more people who worked on the driver in the past and might have
>> experiences
> 
> The current version works fine here. The driver uses whats described in the
> datasheet as "dynamic controller logic flow" and not the "standard
> controller logic flow". The sequence Michal mentioned above is from the
> "standard controller logic flow" section.

Does this change break "dynamic controller logic flow"?

Thanks,
Michal

-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature