On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 01:26:31PM +0200, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries wrote:
On 23/09/20, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries wrote:
On 22/09/20, Jens Wiklander wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 05:27:32PM +0200, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
Allow OP-TEE to specify the number of retries in the adaptor.
Signed-off-by: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz jorge@foundries.io
drivers/tee/optee/rpc.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/tee/optee/rpc.c b/drivers/tee/optee/rpc.c index 1e3614e4798f..2d46a9ecb1de 100644 --- a/drivers/tee/optee/rpc.c +++ b/drivers/tee/optee/rpc.c @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ static void handle_rpc_func_cmd_i2c_transfer(struct tee_context *ctx, struct tee_param *params; size_t i; int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
- int retries = 0; u8 attr[] = { TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_ATTR_TYPE_VALUE_INPUT, TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_ATTR_TYPE_VALUE_INPUT,
@@ -102,12 +103,17 @@ static void handle_rpc_func_cmd_i2c_transfer(struct tee_context *ctx, client.addr = params[0].u.value.c; snprintf(client.name, I2C_NAME_SIZE, "i2c%d", client.adapter->nr);
- /* cache the current value */
- retries = client.adapter->retries;
- switch (params[0].u.value.a) { case OPTEE_MSG_RPC_CMD_I2C_TRANSFER_RD:
client.adapter->retries = params[1].u.value.b;Do we need to take any locks befor this?
no I dont think so: there is no need for bus locks when requesting a transfer via i2c_master_recv/send; the lock for the bus segment gets taken later on, when the actual transfer hppens ( __i2c_transfer())
the functionality implemented in this function pretty much mimicks what is done in the normal world via /dev/i2c-X (drivers/i2c/i2c_dev.c)
correction (of course)
- i2cdev_read --> i2c_master_recv
- i2cdev->write -->i2c_master_send
and now the retry count setup on the adaptor with this commit.
- i2cdev_ioctl I2C_RETRIES
I don't understand. Do you mean that client.adapter->retries doesn't need to be protected from concurrent updates? Or is it already protected by some other mechanism?
Cheers, Jens