Hi Alexander,
alex.aring@xxxxxxxxx wrote on Sun, 27 Mar 2022 11:46:12 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 2:56 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Either the spi operation failed, or the offloaded transmit operation
> > failed and returned a TRAC value. Use this value when available or use
> > the default "SYSTEM_ERROR" otherwise, in order to propagate one step
> > above the error.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c b/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c
> > index d3cf6d23b57e..34d199f597c9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ieee802154/at86rf230.c
> > @@ -358,7 +358,23 @@ static inline void
> > at86rf230_async_error(struct at86rf230_local *lp,
> > struct at86rf230_state_change *ctx, int rc)
> > {
> > - dev_err(&lp->spi->dev, "spi_async error %d\n", rc);
> > + int reason;
> > +
> > + switch (rc) {
>
> I think there was a miscommunication last time, this rc variable is
> not a trac register value, it is a linux errno. Also the error here
> has nothing to do with a trac error. A trac error is the result of the
> offloaded transmit functionality on the transceiver, here we dealing
> about bus communication errors produced by the spi subsystem. What we
> need is to report it to the softmac layer as "IEEE802154_SYSTEM_ERROR"
> (as we decided that this is a user specific error and can be returned
> by the transceiver for non 802.15.4 "error" return code.
>
> > + case TRAC_CHANNEL_ACCESS_FAILURE:
> > + reason = IEEE802154_CHANNEL_ACCESS_FAILURE;
> > + break;
> > + case TRAC_NO_ACK:
> > + reason = IEEE802154_NO_ACK;
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + reason = IEEE802154_SYSTEM_ERROR;
I went for the solution: if it is a bus error, I return SYSTEM ERROR,
otherwise I return a trac error.
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (rc < 0)
> > + dev_err(&lp->spi->dev, "spi_async error %d\n", rc);
> > + else
> > + dev_err(&lp->spi->dev, "xceiver error %d\n", reason);
> >
> > at86rf230_async_state_change(lp, ctx, STATE_FORCE_TRX_OFF,
> > at86rf230_async_error_recover);
> > @@ -666,10 +682,15 @@ at86rf230_tx_trac_check(void *context)
> > case TRAC_SUCCESS:
> > case TRAC_SUCCESS_DATA_PENDING:
> > at86rf230_async_state_change(lp, ctx, STATE_TX_ON, at86rf230_tx_on);
> > + return;
> > + case TRAC_CHANNEL_ACCESS_FAILURE:
> > + case TRAC_NO_ACK:
> > break;
> > default:
> > - at86rf230_async_error(lp, ctx, -EIO);
> > + trac = TRAC_INVALID;
> > }
> > +
> > + at86rf230_async_error(lp, ctx, trac);
>
> That makes no sense, at86rf230_async_error() is not a trac error
> handling, it is a bus error handling. As noted above. With this change
> you mix bus errors and trac errors (which are not bus errors). If
> there are no bus errors then trac should be evaluated and should
> either deliver some 802.15.4 $SUCCESS_CODE or $ERROR_CODE to the
> softmac stack, which is xmit_complete() or xmit_error().
There is no specific path for bus errors, everything is supposedly
asynchronous and all the function return void. In both cases I need to
free the skb. So I am questioning myself about the right solution (need
to think further...)
Thanks,
Miquèl
