| Message ID | 20230529223402.1199503-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | c5c31fb71f16ba75bad4ade208abbae225305b65 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | spi: fsl-dspi: avoid SCK glitches with continuous transfers | expand |
Hi Mark, On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:34:02AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > In other words, the default values (of 0 and 0 ns) result in SCK > glitches where the SCK transition to the idle state, as well as the SCK > transition from the idle state, will have no delay in between, and it > may appear that a SCK cycle has simply gone missing. The resulting > timing violation might cause data corruption in many peripherals, as > their chip select is asserted. I know you don't appreciate content-free pings, but is this patch on your radar? Thanks, Vladimir
On Tue, 30 May 2023 01:34:02 +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > The DSPI controller has configurable timing for > > (a) tCSC: the interval between the assertion of the chip select and the > first clock edge > > (b) tASC: the interval between the last clock edge and the deassertion > of the chip select > > [...] Applied to https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next Thanks! [1/1] spi: fsl-dspi: avoid SCK glitches with continuous transfers commit: c5c31fb71f16ba75bad4ade208abbae225305b65 All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted. You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed. If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing patches will not be replaced. Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying to this mail. Thanks, Mark
On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 03:03:44PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 01:34:02AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > I know you don't appreciate content-free pings, but is this patch on > your radar? It's only been a week, please allow a reasonable time for review especially when there may be other people who work on the driver and should be given a chance to review as is the case here. Had I not already put this into my CI I'd most likely give it a bit longer... Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time for review. People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes) please allow at least a couple of weeks for review. If there have been review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed. Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches for the subsystem are normally handled.
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c index 4339485d202c..674cfe05f411 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c @@ -1002,7 +1002,9 @@ static int dspi_transfer_one_message(struct spi_controller *ctlr, static int dspi_setup(struct spi_device *spi) { struct fsl_dspi *dspi = spi_controller_get_devdata(spi->controller); + u32 period_ns = DIV_ROUND_UP(NSEC_PER_SEC, spi->max_speed_hz); unsigned char br = 0, pbr = 0, pcssck = 0, cssck = 0; + u32 quarter_period_ns = DIV_ROUND_UP(period_ns, 4); u32 cs_sck_delay = 0, sck_cs_delay = 0; struct fsl_dspi_platform_data *pdata; unsigned char pasc = 0, asc = 0; @@ -1031,6 +1033,19 @@ static int dspi_setup(struct spi_device *spi) sck_cs_delay = pdata->sck_cs_delay; } + /* Since tCSC and tASC apply to continuous transfers too, avoid SCK + * glitches of half a cycle by never allowing tCSC + tASC to go below + * half a SCK period. + */ + if (cs_sck_delay < quarter_period_ns) + cs_sck_delay = quarter_period_ns; + if (sck_cs_delay < quarter_period_ns) + sck_cs_delay = quarter_period_ns; + + dev_dbg(&spi->dev, + "DSPI controller timing params: CS-to-SCK delay %u ns, SCK-to-CS delay %u ns\n", + cs_sck_delay, sck_cs_delay); + clkrate = clk_get_rate(dspi->clk); hz_to_spi_baud(&pbr, &br, spi->max_speed_hz, clkrate);
The DSPI controller has configurable timing for (a) tCSC: the interval between the assertion of the chip select and the first clock edge (b) tASC: the interval between the last clock edge and the deassertion of the chip select What is a bit surprising, but is documented in the figure "Example of continuous transfer (CPHA=1, CONT=1)" in the datasheet, is that when the chip select stays asserted between multiple TX FIFO writes, the tCSC and tASC times still apply. With CONT=1, chip select remains asserted, but SCK takes a break and goes to the idle state for tASC + tCSC ns. In other words, the default values (of 0 and 0 ns) result in SCK glitches where the SCK transition to the idle state, as well as the SCK transition from the idle state, will have no delay in between, and it may appear that a SCK cycle has simply gone missing. The resulting timing violation might cause data corruption in many peripherals, as their chip select is asserted. The driver has device tree bindings for tCSC ("fsl,spi-cs-sck-delay") and tASC ("fsl,spi-sck-cs-delay"), but these are only specified to apply when the chip select toggles in the first place, and this timing characteristic depends on each peripheral. Many peripherals do not have explicit timing requirements, so many device trees do not have these properties present at all. Nonetheless, the lack of SCK glitches is a common sense requirement, and since the SCK stays in the idle state during transfers for tCSC+tASC ns, and that in itself should look like half a cycle, then let's ensure that tCSC and tASC are at least a quarter of a SCK period, such that their sum is at least half of one. Fixes: 95bf15f38641 ("spi: fsl-dspi: Add ~50ns delay between cs and sck") Reported-by: Lisa Chen (陈敏捷) <minjie.chen@geekplus.com> Debugged-by: Lisa Chen (陈敏捷) <minjie.chen@geekplus.com> Tested-by: Lisa Chen (陈敏捷) <minjie.chen@geekplus.com> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com> --- drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)