Re: [PATCH 2/4] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Fix incorrect DMA setup
From: Stefan Agner
Date: Fri Nov 18 2016 - 18:45:59 EST
On 2016-11-18 00:04, maitysanchayan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 16-11-17 17:03:19, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 2016-11-17 04:16, Sanchayan Maity wrote:
>> > Currently dmaengine_prep_slave_single was being called with length
>> > set to the complete DMA buffer size. This resulted in unwanted bytes
>> > being transferred to the SPI register leading to clock and MOSI lines
>> > having unwanted data even after chip select got deasserted and the
>> > required bytes having been transferred.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c | 10 ++++++++--
>> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c
>> > index b1ee1f5..aee8c88 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c
>> > @@ -265,7 +265,10 @@ static int dspi_next_xfer_dma_submit(struct fsl_dspi *dspi)
>> >
>> > dma->tx_desc = dmaengine_prep_slave_single(dma->chan_tx,
>> > dma->tx_dma_phys,
>> > - DSPI_DMA_BUFSIZE, DMA_MEM_TO_DEV,
>> > + dma->curr_xfer_len *
>> > + DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_4_BYTES /
>> > + (tx_word ? 2 : 1),
>> > + DMA_MEM_TO_DEV,
>>
>> Hm, this is getting ridiculous, I think we convert curr_xfer_len from
>> bytes to DMA transfers in almost every use.
>>
>> Can we make it be transfer length in actual 4 byte transfers? We then
>> probably have to convert it to bytes once to subtract from
>> curr_remaining_bytes, but I think it would simplify code overall...
>
> Will the below be acceptable fix?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c
> index 41422cd..db7f091 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c
> @@ -217,15 +217,13 @@ static void dspi_rx_dma_callback(void *arg)
> struct fsl_dspi *dspi = arg;
> struct fsl_dspi_dma *dma = dspi->dma;
> int rx_word;
> - int i, len;
> + int i;
> u16 d;
>
> rx_word = is_double_byte_mode(dspi);
>
> - len = rx_word ? (dma->curr_xfer_len / 2) : dma->curr_xfer_len;
> -
> if (!(dspi->dataflags & TRAN_STATE_RX_VOID)) {
> - for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < dma->curr_xfer_len; i++) {
> d = dspi->dma->rx_dma_buf[i];
> rx_word ? (*(u16 *)dspi->rx = d) :
> (*(u8 *)dspi->rx = d);
> @@ -242,14 +240,12 @@ static int /(struct
> fsl_dspi *dspi)
> struct device *dev = &dspi->pdev->dev;
> int time_left;
> int tx_word;
> - int i, len;
> + int i;
> u16 val;
>
> tx_word = is_double_byte_mode(dspi);
>
> - len = tx_word ? (dma->curr_xfer_len / 2) : dma->curr_xfer_len;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < len - 1; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < dma->curr_xfer_len - 1; i++) {
> val = tx_word ? *(u16 *) dspi->tx : *(u8 *) dspi->tx;
> dspi->dma->tx_dma_buf[i] =
> SPI_PUSHR_TXDATA(val) | SPI_PUSHR_PCS(dspi->cs) |
> @@ -267,7 +263,9 @@ static int dspi_next_xfer_dma_submit(struct fsl_dspi *dspi)
>
> dma->tx_desc = dmaengine_prep_slave_single(dma->chan_tx,
> dma->tx_dma_phys,
> - DSPI_DMA_BUFSIZE, DMA_MEM_TO_DEV,
> + dma->curr_xfer_len *
> + DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_4_BYTES,
> + DMA_MEM_TO_DEV,
> DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT | DMA_CTRL_ACK);
> if (!dma->tx_desc) {
> dev_err(dev, "Not able to get desc for DMA xfer\n");
> @@ -283,7 +281,9 @@ static int dspi_next_xfer_dma_submit(struct fsl_dspi *dspi)
>
> dma->rx_desc = dmaengine_prep_slave_single(dma->chan_rx,
> dma->rx_dma_phys,
> - DSPI_DMA_BUFSIZE, DMA_DEV_TO_MEM,
> + dma->curr_xfer_len *
> + DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_4_BYTES,
> + DMA_DEV_TO_MEM,
> DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT | DMA_CTRL_ACK);
> if (!dma->rx_desc) {
> dev_err(dev, "Not able to get desc for DMA xfer\n");
> @@ -330,17 +330,17 @@ static int dspi_dma_xfer(struct fsl_dspi *dspi)
> struct device *dev = &dspi->pdev->dev;
> int curr_remaining_bytes;
> int bytes_per_buffer;
> - int tx_word;
> + int tx_word = 1;
> int ret = 0;
>
> - tx_word = is_double_byte_mode(dspi);
> + if (is_double_byte_mode(dspi))
> + tx_word = 2;
I would try to be consistent with tx_word. In most other cases it is
used as boolean, whether this is a 2 byte word or not.
Here you change it to represent the length of a single transfer/frame.
Nothing wrong with that, just if you do such changes, also change the
name of the variable so the reader does not get miss lead from other
uses of "tx_word"...
But otherwise looks good, like this variant much better!
Maybe we should add a comment in struct fsl_dspi_dma:
/* Length of transfer in words of DSPI_FIFO_SIZE */
--
Stefan
> curr_remaining_bytes = dspi->len;
> + bytes_per_buffer = DSPI_DMA_BUFSIZE / DSPI_FIFO_SIZE;
> while (curr_remaining_bytes) {
> /* Check if current transfer fits the DMA buffer */
> - dma->curr_xfer_len = curr_remaining_bytes;
> - bytes_per_buffer = DSPI_DMA_BUFSIZE /
> - (DSPI_FIFO_SIZE / (tx_word ? 2 : 1));
> - if (curr_remaining_bytes > bytes_per_buffer)
> + dma->curr_xfer_len = curr_remaining_bytes / tx_word;
> + if (dma->curr_xfer_len > bytes_per_buffer)
> dma->curr_xfer_len = bytes_per_buffer;
>
> ret = dspi_next_xfer_dma_submit(dspi);
> @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ static int dspi_dma_xfer(struct fsl_dspi *dspi)
> goto exit;
>
> } else {
> - curr_remaining_bytes -= dma->curr_xfer_len;
> + curr_remaining_bytes -= dma->curr_xfer_len * tx_word;
> if (curr_remaining_bytes < 0)
> curr_remaining_bytes = 0;
> dspi->len = curr_remaining_bytes;
>
>
> Regards,
> Sanchayan.
>>
>> --
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>> > DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT | DMA_CTRL_ACK);
>> > if (!dma->tx_desc) {
>> > dev_err(dev, "Not able to get desc for DMA xfer\n");
>> > @@ -281,7 +284,10 @@ static int dspi_next_xfer_dma_submit(struct fsl_dspi *dspi)
>> >
>> > dma->rx_desc = dmaengine_prep_slave_single(dma->chan_rx,
>> > dma->rx_dma_phys,
>> > - DSPI_DMA_BUFSIZE, DMA_DEV_TO_MEM,
>> > + dma->curr_xfer_len *
>> > + DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_4_BYTES /
>> > + (tx_word ? 2 : 1),
>> > + DMA_DEV_TO_MEM,
>> > DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT | DMA_CTRL_ACK);
>> > if (!dma->rx_desc) {
>> > dev_err(dev, "Not able to get desc for DMA xfer\n");