Hi Luca,
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 09:45:56AM +0200, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> On 20/04/20 21:57, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 09:24:25PM +0200, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> >> On 19/04/20 20:02, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>>> +static irqreturn_t xcsi2rxss_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct xcsi2rxss_state *state = (struct xcsi2rxss_state *)dev_id;
> >>>> + struct xcsi2rxss_core *core = &state->core;
> >>>> + u32 status;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + status = xcsi2rxss_read(core, XCSI_ISR_OFFSET) & XCSI_ISR_ALLINTR_MASK;
> >>>> + dev_dbg_ratelimited(core->dev, "interrupt status = 0x%08x\n", status);
> >>>
> >>> As this is expected to occur for every frame, I would drop the message,
> >>> even if rate-limited.
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!status)
> >>>> + return IRQ_NONE;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Received a short packet */
> >>>> + if (status & XCSI_ISR_SPFIFONE) {
> >>>> + dev_dbg_ratelimited(core->dev, "Short packet = 0x%08x\n",
> >>>> + xcsi2rxss_read(core, XCSI_SPKTR_OFFSET));
> >>>> + }
> >>>
> >>> Same here, this will occur all the time, I'd remove this message. You
> >>> need to read XCSI_SPKTR_OFFSET though, and you should do so in a loop
> >>> until the XCSI_CSR_SPFIFONE in XCSI_CSR_OFFSET is cleared in case
> >>> multiple short packets are received before the interrupt handler
> >>> executes.
> >>>
> >>> I also wonder if it would make sense to extract the frame number from
> >>> the FS short packet, and make it available through the subdev API. I
> >>> think it should be reported through a V4L2_EVENT_FRAME_SYNC event. This
> >>> can be implemented later.
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Short packet FIFO overflow */
> >>>> + if (status & XCSI_ISR_SPFIFOF)
> >>>> + dev_dbg_ratelimited(core->dev, "Short packet FIFO overflowed\n");
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * Stream line buffer full
> >>>> + * This means there is a backpressure from downstream IP
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + if (status & XCSI_ISR_SLBF) {
> >>>> + dev_alert_ratelimited(core->dev, "Stream Line Buffer Full!\n");
> >>>> + xcsi2rxss_stop_stream(state);
> >>>> + if (core->rst_gpio) {
> >>>> + gpiod_set_value(core->rst_gpio, 1);
> >>>> + /* minimum 40 dphy_clk_200M cycles */
> >>>> + ndelay(250);
> >>>> + gpiod_set_value(core->rst_gpio, 0);
> >>>> + }
> >>>
> >>> I don't think you should stop the core here. xcsi2rxss_stop_stream()
> >>> calls the source .s_stream(0) operation, which usually involves I2C
> >>> writes that will sleep.
> >>>
> >>> You should instead report an event to userspace (it looks like we have
> >>> no error event defined in V4L2, one should be added), and rely on the
> >>> normal stop procedure.
> >>
> >> FWIW, since a long time I've been using a modified version of this
> >> routine, where after a Stream Line Buffer Full condition I just stop and
> >> restart the csi2rx core and the stream continues after a minimal glitch.
> >> Other subdev are unaware that anything has happened and keep on streaming.
> >>
> >> Not sure this is the correct thing to do, but it's working for me. Also
> >> I proposed this topic in one of the previous iterations of this patch,
> >> but the situation was different because the stream on/off was not
> >> propagated back at that time.
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback. How often does this occur in practice ?
>
> Quite often indeed in my case, as the MIPI stream comes from a remote
> sensor via a video serdes chipset, and both the cable and the remote
> sensor module are subject to heavy EMI. Depending on the setup I
> observed SLBF happening up to 5~10 times per hour.
Ouch, that is a lot ! Is that really caused by EMI though ? I thought
SLBF was due to the downstream components applying backpressure.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
