Hi Tomi,
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 14:12:32 +0200
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 20/03/2023 10:28, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> > Hello Matthias,
> >
> > thanks for the in-depth review!
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 07:34:34 +0100
> > zzam@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> >> Some inline comments below.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Matthias
> >>
> >> Am 22.02.23 um 14:29 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen:
> >>> From: Luca Ceresoli <luca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> An ATR is a device that looks similar to an i2c-mux: it has an I2C
> >>> slave "upstream" port and N master "downstream" ports, and forwards
> >>> transactions from upstream to the appropriate downstream port. But it
> >>> is different in that the forwarded transaction has a different slave
> >>> address. The address used on the upstream bus is called the "alias"
> >>> and is (potentially) different from the physical slave address of the
> >>> downstream chip.
> >>>
> >>> Add a helper file (just like i2c-mux.c for a mux or switch) to allow
> >>> implementing ATR features in a device driver. The helper takes care or
> >>> adapter creation/destruction and translates addresses at each transaction.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> Documentation/i2c/index.rst | 1 +
> >>> Documentation/i2c/muxes/i2c-atr.rst | 97 +++++
> >>> MAINTAINERS | 8 +
> >>> drivers/i2c/Kconfig | 9 +
> >>> drivers/i2c/Makefile | 1 +
> >>> drivers/i2c/i2c-atr.c | 548 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>> include/linux/i2c-atr.h | 116 ++++++
> >>> 7 files changed, 780 insertions(+)
> >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/i2c/muxes/i2c-atr.rst
> >>> create mode 100644 drivers/i2c/i2c-atr.c
> >>> create mode 100644 include/linux/i2c-atr.h
> >>>
> >> [...]
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-atr.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-atr.c
> >>> new file mode 100644
> >>> index 000000000000..5ab890b83670
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-atr.c
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,548 @@
> >> [...]
> >>> +
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * Replace all message addresses with their aliases, saving the original
> >>> + * addresses.
> >>> + *
> >>> + * This function is internal for use in i2c_atr_master_xfer(). It must be
> >>> + * followed by i2c_atr_unmap_msgs() to restore the original addresses.
> >>> + */
> >>> +static int i2c_atr_map_msgs(struct i2c_atr_chan *chan, struct i2c_msg *msgs,
> >>> + int num)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct i2c_atr *atr = chan->atr;
> >>> + static struct i2c_atr_cli2alias_pair *c2a;
> >>> + int i;
> >>> +
> >>> + /* Ensure we have enough room to save the original addresses */
> >>> + if (unlikely(chan->orig_addrs_size < num)) {
> >>> + u16 *new_buf;
> >>> +
> >>> + /* We don't care about old data, hence no realloc() */
> >>> + new_buf = kmalloc_array(num, sizeof(*new_buf), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> + if (!new_buf)
> >>> + return -ENOMEM;
> >>> +
> >>> + kfree(chan->orig_addrs);
> >>> + chan->orig_addrs = new_buf;
> >>> + chan->orig_addrs_size = num;
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> + for (i = 0; i < num; i++) {
> >>> + chan->orig_addrs[i] = msgs[i].addr;
> >>> +
> >>> + c2a = i2c_atr_find_mapping_by_addr(&chan->alias_list,
> >>> + msgs[i].addr);
> >>> + if (!c2a) {
> >>> + dev_err(atr->dev, "client 0x%02x not mapped!\n",
> >>> + msgs[i].addr);
> >>> + return -ENXIO;
> >> I miss the roll-back of previously modified msgs[].addr values.
> >
> > Indeed you have a point. There is a subtle error in case all of the
> > following happen in a single i2c_atr_master_xfer() call:
> >
> > * there are 2+ messages, having different addresses
> > * msg[0] is mapped correctly
> > * msg[n] (n > 0) fails mapping
> >
> > It's very unlikely, but in this case we'd get back to the caller with
> > an error and modified addresses for the first n messages. Which in turn
> > is unlikely to create any problems, but it could.
> >
> > Tomi, do you agree?
> >
> > This looks like a simple solution:
> >
> > if (!c2a) {
> > + i2c_atr_unmap_msgs(chan, msgs, i);
> > ...
> > }
>
> Wouldn't that possibly restore the address from orig_addrs[x] also for
> messages we haven't handled yet?
No, because there is 'i' as the 3rd argument, not 'num'. But...
>
> I think a simple
>
> while (i--)
> msgs[i].addr = chan->orig_addrs[i];
>
> should do here. It is also, perhaps, a bit more clear this way, as you
> can see the assignments to msgs[i].addr nearby, and the rollback here
> with the above code. Instead of seeing a call to an unmap function,
> having to go and see what exactly it will do.
...sure, this would work. If I had connected my brain at the
appropriate time I would have realized it's two lines only. And
definitely less spaghetti-coded that what I had suggested.
Luca
--
Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
