| Message ID | 20201207113827.2902-1-bongsu.jeon@samsung.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net-next] nfc: s3fwrn5: Change irqflags | expand |
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:38:27PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > From: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> > > change irqflags from IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH to IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING for stable > Samsung's nfc interrupt handling. 1. Describe in commit title/subject the change. Just a word "change irqflags" is not enough. 2. Describe in commit message what you are trying to fix. Before was not stable? The "for stable interrupt handling" is a little bit vauge. 3. This is contradictory to the bindings and current DTS. I think the driver should not force the specific trigger type because I could imagine some configuration that the actual interrupt to the CPU is routed differently. Instead, how about removing the trigger flags here and fixing the DTS and bindings example? Best regards, Krzysztof > > Signed-off-by: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> > --- > drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c > index e1bdde105f24..016f6b6df849 100644 > --- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c > +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c > @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > return ret; > > ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev, phy->i2c_dev->irq, NULL, > - s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT, > + s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_ONESHOT, > S3FWRN5_I2C_DRIVER_NAME, phy); > if (ret) > s3fwrn5_remove(phy->common.ndev); > -- > 2.17.1 >
On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 8:51 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:38:27PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > > From: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> > > > > change irqflags from IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH to IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING for stable > > Samsung's nfc interrupt handling. > > 1. Describe in commit title/subject the change. Just a word "change irqflags" is > not enough. > Ok. I'll update it. > 2. Describe in commit message what you are trying to fix. Before was not > stable? The "for stable interrupt handling" is a little bit vauge. > Usually, Samsung's NFC Firmware sends an i2c frame as below. 1. NFC Firmware sets the gpio(interrupt pin) high when there is an i2c frame to send. 2. If the CPU's I2C master has received the i2c frame, NFC F/W sets the gpio low. NFC driver's i2c interrupt handler would be called in the abnormal case as the NFC F/W task of number 2 is delayed because of other high priority tasks. In that case, NFC driver will try to receive the i2c frame but there isn't any i2c frame to send in NFC. It would cause an I2C communication problem. This case would hardly happen. But, I changed the interrupt as a defense code. If Driver uses the TRIGGER_RISING not LEVEL trigger, there would be no problem even if the NFC F/W task is delayed. > 3. This is contradictory to the bindings and current DTS. I think the > driver should not force the specific trigger type because I could > imagine some configuration that the actual interrupt to the CPU is > routed differently. > > Instead, how about removing the trigger flags here and fixing the DTS > and bindings example? > As I mentioned before, I changed this code because of Samsung NFC's I2C Communication way. So, I think that it is okay for the nfc driver to force the specific trigger type( EDGE_RISING). What do you think about it? > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> > > --- > > drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c > > index e1bdde105f24..016f6b6df849 100644 > > --- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c > > +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c > > @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > > return ret; > > > > ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev, phy->i2c_dev->irq, NULL, > > - s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT, > > + s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_ONESHOT, > > S3FWRN5_I2C_DRIVER_NAME, phy); > > if (ret) > > s3fwrn5_remove(phy->common.ndev); > > -- > > 2.17.1 > >
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 10:39:01PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 8:51 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:38:27PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > > > From: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> > > > > > > change irqflags from IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH to IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING for stable > > > Samsung's nfc interrupt handling. > > > > 1. Describe in commit title/subject the change. Just a word "change irqflags" is > > not enough. > > > Ok. I'll update it. > > > 2. Describe in commit message what you are trying to fix. Before was not > > stable? The "for stable interrupt handling" is a little bit vauge. > > > Usually, Samsung's NFC Firmware sends an i2c frame as below. > > 1. NFC Firmware sets the gpio(interrupt pin) high when there is an i2c > frame to send. > 2. If the CPU's I2C master has received the i2c frame, NFC F/W sets > the gpio low. > > NFC driver's i2c interrupt handler would be called in the abnormal case > as the NFC F/W task of number 2 is delayed because of other high > priority tasks. > In that case, NFC driver will try to receive the i2c frame but there > isn't any i2c frame > to send in NFC. It would cause an I2C communication problem. > This case would hardly happen. > But, I changed the interrupt as a defense code. > If Driver uses the TRIGGER_RISING not LEVEL trigger, there would be no problem > even if the NFC F/W task is delayed. All this should be explained in commit message, not in the email. > > > 3. This is contradictory to the bindings and current DTS. I think the > > driver should not force the specific trigger type because I could > > imagine some configuration that the actual interrupt to the CPU is > > routed differently. > > > > Instead, how about removing the trigger flags here and fixing the DTS > > and bindings example? > > > > As I mentioned before, > I changed this code because of Samsung NFC's I2C Communication way. > So, I think that it is okay for the nfc driver to force the specific > trigger type( EDGE_RISING). > > What do you think about it? Some different chip or some different hardware implementation could have the signal inverted, e.g. edge falling, not rising. This is rather a theoretical scenario but still such change makes the code more generic, configurable with DTS. Therefore trigger mode should be configured via DTS, not enforced by the driver. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 11:13 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 10:39:01PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 8:51 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:38:27PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > > > > From: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> > > > > > > > > change irqflags from IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH to IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING for stable > > > > Samsung's nfc interrupt handling. > > > > > > 1. Describe in commit title/subject the change. Just a word "change irqflags" is > > > not enough. > > > > > Ok. I'll update it. > > > > > 2. Describe in commit message what you are trying to fix. Before was not > > > stable? The "for stable interrupt handling" is a little bit vauge. > > > > > Usually, Samsung's NFC Firmware sends an i2c frame as below. > > > > 1. NFC Firmware sets the gpio(interrupt pin) high when there is an i2c > > frame to send. > > 2. If the CPU's I2C master has received the i2c frame, NFC F/W sets > > the gpio low. > > > > NFC driver's i2c interrupt handler would be called in the abnormal case > > as the NFC F/W task of number 2 is delayed because of other high > > priority tasks. > > In that case, NFC driver will try to receive the i2c frame but there > > isn't any i2c frame > > to send in NFC. It would cause an I2C communication problem. > > This case would hardly happen. > > But, I changed the interrupt as a defense code. > > If Driver uses the TRIGGER_RISING not LEVEL trigger, there would be no problem > > even if the NFC F/W task is delayed. > > All this should be explained in commit message, not in the email. > Okay. I will > > > > > 3. This is contradictory to the bindings and current DTS. I think the > > > driver should not force the specific trigger type because I could > > > imagine some configuration that the actual interrupt to the CPU is > > > routed differently. > > > > > > Instead, how about removing the trigger flags here and fixing the DTS > > > and bindings example? > > > > > > > As I mentioned before, > > I changed this code because of Samsung NFC's I2C Communication way. > > So, I think that it is okay for the nfc driver to force the specific > > trigger type( EDGE_RISING). > > > > What do you think about it? > > Some different chip or some different hardware implementation could have > the signal inverted, e.g. edge falling, not rising. This is rather > a theoretical scenario but still such change makes the code more > generic, configurable with DTS. Therefore trigger mode should be > configured via DTS, not enforced by the driver. > Okay. I understand it. > Best regards, > Krzysztof
diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c index e1bdde105f24..016f6b6df849 100644 --- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client, return ret; ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev, phy->i2c_dev->irq, NULL, - s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT, + s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_ONESHOT, S3FWRN5_I2C_DRIVER_NAME, phy); if (ret) s3fwrn5_remove(phy->common.ndev);