On 28.06.2024 14:39, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 12:29 PM claudiu beznea
> <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 28.06.2024 12:13, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:12 AM claudiu beznea
>>> <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 28.06.2024 11:09, Biju Das wrote:
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> On 28.06.2024 10:55, Biju Das wrote:
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> Patch 09/12 "i2c: riic: Add support for fast mode plus" adds a new member to struct
>>>>>> riic_of_data.
>>>>>>>> That new member is needed to differentiate b/w hardware versions
>>>>>>>> supporting fast mode plus based on compatible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are we sure RZ/A does not support fast mode plus?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From commit description of patch 09/12:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fast mode plus is available on most of the IP variants that RIIC driver is working with. The
>>>>>> exception is (according to HW manuals of the SoCs where this IP is available) the Renesas RZ/A1H.
>>>>>> For this, patch introduces the struct riic_of_data::fast_mode_plus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I checked the manuals of all the SoCs where this driver is used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven't checked the H/W manual?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the manual I've downloaded from Renesas web site the FMPE bit of RIICnFER is not available on
>>>>>> RZ/A1H.
>>>>>
>>>>> I just found RZ/A2M manual, it supports FMP and register layout looks similar to RZ/G2L.
>>>>
>>>> I introduced struct riic_of_data::fast_mode_plus because of RZ/A1H.
>>>
>>> Do you need to check for that?
>>>
>>> The ICFER_FMPE bit won't be set unless the user specifies the FM+
>>> clock-frequency. Setting clock-frequency beyond Fast Mode on RZ/A1H
>>> would be very wrong.
>>
>> I need it to avoid this scenario ^. In patch 09/12 there is this code:
>>
>> + if ((!info->fast_mode_plus && t->bus_freq_hz > I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ) ||
>> + (info->fast_mode_plus && t->bus_freq_hz > I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_PLUS_FREQ)) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "unsupported bus speed (%dHz). %d max\n", t->bus_freq_hz,
>> + info->fast_mode_plus ? I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_PLUS_FREQ :
>> + I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ);
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
FTR, the full context of this change is (from patch 09/12):
@@ -315,11 +319,13 @@ static int riic_init_hw(struct riic_dev *riic)
int total_ticks, cks, brl, brh;
struct i2c_timings *t = &riic->i2c_t;
struct device *dev = riic->adapter.dev.parent;
+ const struct riic_of_data *info = riic->info;
- if (t->bus_freq_hz > I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ) {
- dev_err(dev,
- "unsupported bus speed (%dHz). %d max\n",
- t->bus_freq_hz, I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ);
+ if ((!info->fast_mode_plus && t->bus_freq_hz > I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ) ||
+ (info->fast_mode_plus && t->bus_freq_hz > I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_PLUS_FREQ)) {
+ dev_err(dev, "unsupported bus speed (%dHz). %d max\n", t->bus_freq_hz,
+ info->fast_mode_plus ? I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_PLUS_FREQ :
+ I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ);
return -EINVAL;
}
Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea
>> to avoid giving the user the possibility to set FM+ freq on platforms not
>> supporting it.
>>
>> Please let me know if I'm missing something (or wrongly understood your
>> statement).
>
> Wolfram/Andi: what is your view on this?
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
