Hi Andi,
> On 6 Sep 2023, at 01.08, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Sean,
>
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 07:29:59AM +0200, Sean Nyekjaer wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>>> On 3 Sep 2023, at 14.46, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Pierre-Yves, Alain,
>>>
>>> mind taking a look here?
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> @@ -357,6 +357,7 @@ struct stm32f7_i2c_dev {
>>>> u32 dnf_dt;
>>>> u32 dnf;
>>>> struct stm32f7_i2c_alert *alert;
>>>> + bool atomic;
>>>
>>> this smells a bit racy here, this works only if the xfer's are
>>> always sequential.
>>>
>>> What happens when we receive at the same time two xfer's, one
>>> atomic and one non atomic?
>>
>> From the include/i2c.h:
>> * @master_xfer_atomic: same as @master_xfer. Yet, only using atomic context
>> * so e.g. PMICs can be accessed very late before shutdown. Optional.
>>
>> So it’s only used very late in the shutdown.
>>
>> It’s implemented the same way as in:
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-meson.c
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
>> … etc…
>>
>>
>> In drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h it’s determined whether it’s atomic transfer or not:
>>
>> /*
>> * We only allow atomic transfers for very late communication, e.g. to access a
>> * PMIC when powering down. Atomic transfers are a corner case and not for
>> * generic use!
>> */
>> static inline bool i2c_in_atomic_xfer_mode(void)
>> {
>> return system_state > SYSTEM_RUNNING && irqs_disabled();
>> }
>>
>> So you would not have an atomic transfer and later an non atomic.
>
> What about the opposite? I.e. a non atomic and later an atomic,
> for very late tardive communications :)
Sure it’s the opposite? Normal scenario is “non atomic” transfers going on and under shutdown it switches to “atomic”.
>From i2c_in_atomic_xfer_mode() it can’t go from “atomic” -> “non atomic”.
extern enum system_states {
SYSTEM_BOOTING,
SYSTEM_SCHEDULING,
SYSTEM_FREEING_INITMEM,
SYSTEM_RUNNING,
SYSTEM_HALT,
SYSTEM_POWER_OFF,
SYSTEM_RESTART,
SYSTEM_SUSPEND,
} system_state;
If you are asking what happens if a “non atomic” transfer is ongoing and irq’s is disabled, IDK.
Let’s get Wolfram in the loop (Sorry I forgot to add you) :)
/Sean
