From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>
To: York Sun <yorksun@freescale•com>
Cc: albrecht.dress@arcor•de, linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] power/mpc85xx: Add delay after enabling I2C master
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:04 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1374604984.15592.34@snotra> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51EEA34A.9050400@freescale.com> (from yorksun@freescale.com on Tue Jul 23 10:37:46 2013)
On 07/23/2013 10:37:46 AM, York Sun wrote:
> On 07/22/2013 05:33 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 02:27:08PM -0700, York Sun wrote:
> >> Erratum A-006037 indicates I2C controller executes the write to =20
> I2CCR only
> >> after it sees SCL idle for 64K cycle of internal I2C controller =20
> clocks. If
> >> during this waiting period, I2C controller is disabled (I2CCR[MEN] =20
> set to
> >> 0), then the controller could end in bad state, and hang the =20
> future access
> >> to I2C register.
> >>
> >> The mpc_i2c_fixup() function tries to recover the bus from a =20
> stalled state
> >> where the 9th clock pulse wasn't generated. However, this =20
> workaround
> >> disables and enables I2C controller without meeting waiting =20
> requirement of
> >> this erratum.
> >>
> >> This erratum applies to some 85xx SoCs. It is safe to apply to all =20
> of them
> >> for mpc_i2c_fixup().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: York Sun <yorksun@freescale•com>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> I'd like to get rid of the #ifdef if mpc5121 is OK with the longer =20
> delay.
> >
> > Are mpc5121 and mpc85xx the only things that use this?
>=20
> No. 83xx and 86xx also uses this file. But I am only unsure if mpc52xx
> is OK with this extended delay. I guess they are but I don't have a
> proof, or someone to confirm.
>=20
> >
> > Are you sure the delay always works out to be longer? What is the
> > relationship between fsl_get_sys_freq() and i2c->real_clk?
>=20
> Yes. The max divider from sys clock to i2c clcok is 32K.
> i2c->real_clk is the clock I2C controller pumps out, not its internal =20
> operation clock.
32K is the max for all implementations?
BTW, Where does the "2000000" come from? Shouldn't it be 1000000 if =20
you're converting to usec? If you're trying to add some slack, say so =20
rather than having a comment suggest that the output of that formula is =20
64K cycles. Or is there an implicit assumption that i2c runs at half =20
the system frequency? Is that assumption true for all implementations =20
that have this erratum?
> > In any case, you should send this patch to the i2c maintainer and =20
> list.
> >
>=20
> I don't have the name on top of my head. Is that =20
> linux-i2c@vger•kernel.org?
Yes, and Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams•de> is the maintainer. This is =20
listed in the MAINTAINERS file.
-Scott=
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-23 18:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-13 21:27 [PATCH RFC] power/mpc85xx: Add delay after enabling I2C master York Sun
2013-07-23 0:33 ` [RFC] " Scott Wood
2013-07-23 15:37 ` York Sun
2013-07-23 18:43 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2013-07-23 20:32 ` York Sun
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=1374604984.15592.34@snotra \
--to=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
--cc=albrecht.dress@arcor$(echo .)de \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists$(echo .)ozlabs.org \
--cc=yorksun@freescale$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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