Hi Aaron,

On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 11:28:29 -0600 (CST), Aaron Sierra wrote:
> Previously, the at24 driver would bail out in the case of a 16-bit
> addressable EEPROM attached to an SMBus controller. This is because
> SMBus block reads and writes don't map to I2C multi-byte reads and
> writes when the offset portion is 2 bytes.
> 
> Instead of bailing out, this patch settles for functioning with single
> byte read SMBus cycles. Writes can be block or single-byte, depending
> on SMBus controller features.
> 
> Read access is not without some risk. Multiple SMBus cycles are
> required to read even one byte. If the SMBus has multiple masters and
> one accesses this EEPROM between the dummy address write and the
> subsequent current-address-read cycle(s), this driver will receive
> data from the wrong address.
> 
> Functionality has been tested with the following devices:
> 
>     AT24CM01 attached to Intel ISCH SMBus
>     AT24C512 attached to Intel I801 SMBus
> 
> Read performance:
>     3.6 KB/s with 32-byte* access
> 
>     *limited to 32-bytes by I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX.
> 
> Write performance:
>     248 B/s with 1-byte page (default)
>     3.9 KB/s with 128-byte* page (via platform data)
> 
>     *limited to 31-bytes by I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX - 1.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nate Case <nc...@xes-inc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Sierra <asie...@xes-inc.com>
> ---
>  v2 - Account for changes related to introduction of
>       i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data_or_emulated()
>  v3 - Consolidate three patches into one
>     - Expand comments regarding SMBus multi-master read risks.
>     - Rely on current-address-read for improved read performance (i.e. one
>       dummy address write followed by multiple individual byte reads).
>       This improves performance from 1.4 KiB/s to 3.6 KiB/s.
>     - Use struct at24_data's writebuf instead of kzalloc-ing
>     - Only limit write_max by 1-byte when accessing a 16-bit device with
>       block writes instead of attempting to preserve a power-of-two.
>     - Style fixes (indentation, parentheses, unnecessary masking, etc.)
> 
>  drivers/misc/eeprom/Kconfig |   4 +-
>  drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c  | 118 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  2 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/eeprom/Kconfig b/drivers/misc/eeprom/Kconfig
> index 04f2e1f..bc79a44 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/eeprom/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/misc/eeprom/Kconfig
> @@ -22,7 +22,9 @@ config EEPROM_AT24
>  
>         If you use this with an SMBus adapter instead of an I2C adapter,
>         full functionality is not available.  Only smaller devices are
> -       supported (24c16 and below, max 4 kByte).
> +       supported via block reads (24c16 and below, max 4 kByte).
> +       Larger devices that use 16-bit addresses will only work with
> +       individual byte reads, which is very slow.

... and unsafe on multi-master topologies.

>  
>         This driver can also be built as a module.  If so, the module
>         will be called at24.
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> index 5d7c090..35c5c83 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
>   * Other than binding model, current differences from "eeprom" driver are
>   * that this one handles write access and isn't restricted to 24c02 devices.
>   * It also handles larger devices (32 kbit and up) with two-byte addresses,
> - * which won't work on pure SMBus systems.
> + * which don't work without risks on pure SMBus systems.
>   */
>  
>  struct at24_data {
> @@ -141,6 +141,86 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, at24_acpi_ids);
>  /*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
>  
>  /*
> + * Write a byte to an AT24 device using SMBus cycles.
> + */
> +static inline s32 at24_smbus_write_byte_data(struct at24_data *at24,
> +     struct i2c_client *client, u16 offset, u8 value)
> +{
> +     if (!(at24->chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16))
> +             return i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, offset, value);
> +
> +     /*
> +      * Emulate I2C multi-byte write by using SMBus "write word"
> +      * cycle.  We split up the 16-bit offset among the "command"
> +      * byte and the first data byte.
> +      */
> +     return i2c_smbus_write_word_data(client,
> +             offset >> 8, (value << 8) | (offset & 0xff));
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Write block data to an AT24 device using SMBus cycles.
> + */
> +static inline s32 at24_smbus_write_i2c_block_data(struct at24_data *at24,
> +     const struct i2c_client *client, u16 off, u8 len, const u8 *vals)
> +{
> +     s32 res;
> +
> +     if (!(at24->chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16))
> +             return i2c_smbus_write_i2c_block_data(client, off, len, vals);
> +
> +     /* Insert extra address byte into data stream */
> +     at24->writebuf[0] = off & 0xff;
> +     memcpy(&at24->writebuf[1], vals, len);
> +
> +     res = i2c_smbus_write_i2c_block_data(client,
> +             off >> 8, len + 1, at24->writebuf);
> +
> +     return res;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Read block data from an AT24 device using SMBus cycles.
> + */
> +static inline s32 at24_smbus_read_block_data(struct at24_data *at24,
> +     const struct i2c_client *client, u16 off, u8 len, u8 *vals)
> +{
> +     int count = 0;

As a minor optimization, "count" could be initialized later, right
before the do/while loop.

> +     s32 res;
> +
> +     if (!(at24->chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16))
> +             return i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data_or_emulated(client,
> +                             off, len, vals);
> +
> +     /*
> +      * Emulate I2C multi-byte read by using SMBus "write byte" and
> +      * "receive byte".  This is slightly unsafe since there is an
> +      * additional STOP involved, which exposes the SMBus and (this
> +      * device!) to takeover by another bus master. However, it's the
> +      * only way to work on SMBus-only controllers when talking to
> +      * EEPROMs with multi-byte addresses.
> +      */
> +
> +     /* Address "dummy" write */
> +     res = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, off >> 8, off & 0xff);
> +     if (res < 0)
> +             return res;
> +
> +     do {
> +             /* Current Address Read */
> +             res = i2c_smbus_read_byte(client);
> +             if (res < 0)
> +                     break;
> +
> +             *(vals++) = res;
> +             count++;
> +             len--;
> +     } while (len > 0);

You never checked that the adapter supports
I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BYTE_DATA and I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE.

> +
> +     return count;
> +}
> +
> +/*
>   * This routine supports chips which consume multiple I2C addresses. It
>   * computes the addressing information to be used for a given r/w request.
>   * Assumes that sanity checks for offset happened at sysfs-layer.
> @@ -229,7 +309,7 @@ static ssize_t at24_eeprom_read(struct at24_data *at24, 
> char *buf,

Earlier in this function is a test:

        if (at24->use_smbus) {
                /* Smaller eeproms can work given some SMBus extension calls */
                if (count > I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX)
                        count = I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX;

Limiting count that way is not needed in the 16-bit addressing case.
Skipping this will bring a small performance boost (4-5 %) as you
will be able to read the whole EEPROM after setting the initial address
pointer only once, rather than every 32 bytes. Can be done in a
separate commit.

>       do {
>               read_time = jiffies;
>               if (at24->use_smbus) {
> -                     status = 
> i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data_or_emulated(client, offset,
> +                     status = at24_smbus_read_block_data(at24, client, 
> offset,
>                                                                          
> count, buf);

Both lines are over 80 columns, and please preserve the alignment on
the opening parenthesis.

>               } else {
>                       status = i2c_transfer(client->adapter, msg, 2);
> @@ -351,12 +431,12 @@ static ssize_t at24_eeprom_write(struct at24_data 
> *at24, const char *buf,
>               if (at24->use_smbus_write) {
>                       switch (at24->use_smbus_write) {
>                       case I2C_SMBUS_I2C_BLOCK_DATA:
> -                             status = i2c_smbus_write_i2c_block_data(client,
> -                                             offset, count, buf);
> +                             status = at24_smbus_write_i2c_block_data(at24,
> +                                             client, offset, count, buf);
>                               break;
>                       case I2C_SMBUS_BYTE_DATA:
> -                             status = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client,
> -                                             offset, buf[0]);
> +                             status = at24_smbus_write_byte_data(at24,
> +                                             client, offset, buf[0]);
>                               break;
>                       }
>  
> @@ -527,10 +607,13 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const 
> struct i2c_device_id *id)
>  
>       /* Use I2C operations unless we're stuck with SMBus extensions. */
>       if (!i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter, I2C_FUNC_I2C)) {
> -             if (chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16)
> -                     return -EPFNOSUPPORT;
> -
> -             if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
> +             if (chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16) {
> +                     /*
> +                      * This will be slow, but better than nothing
> +                      * (e.g. read @ 3.6 KiB/s).
> +                      */
> +                     use_smbus = I2C_SMBUS_BYTE_DATA;
> +             } else if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
>                               I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_I2C_BLOCK)) {
>                       use_smbus = I2C_SMBUS_I2C_BLOCK_DATA;
>               } else if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
> @@ -549,7 +632,17 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const 
> struct i2c_device_id *id)
>               if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
>                               I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_I2C_BLOCK)) {
>                       use_smbus_write = I2C_SMBUS_I2C_BLOCK_DATA;
> -             } else if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
> +             } else if ((chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16) &&
> +                 i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
> +                             I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_WORD_DATA)) {
> +                     /*
> +                      * We need SMBUS_WRITE_WORD_DATA to implement
> +                      * byte writes for 16-bit address devices.
> +                      */
> +                     use_smbus_write = I2C_SMBUS_BYTE_DATA;
> +                     chip.page_size = 1;
> +             } else if (!(chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16) &&
> +                     i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter,
>                               I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BYTE_DATA)) {
>                       use_smbus_write = I2C_SMBUS_BYTE_DATA;
>                       chip.page_size = 1;
> @@ -599,7 +692,8 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const 
> struct i2c_device_id *id)
>                       if (write_max > io_limit)
>                               write_max = io_limit;
>                       if (use_smbus && write_max > I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX)
> -                             write_max = I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX;
> +                             write_max = I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX -
> +                                     !!(chip.flags & AT24_FLAG_ADDR16);

This test still looks wrong to me when AT24_FLAG_ADDR16 is set. If
write_max is 33 you'll properly clip it to 31. However if it's 32
you'll leave it at 32 and the subsequent block write attempts of 33
bytes will fail.

>                       at24->write_max = write_max;
>  
>                       /* buffer (data + address at the beginning) */

Otherwise looks "good", assuming the user understands the risks and
limitations.

-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to