On Jun 2 17:40, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > On 6/2/22 16:29, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote: > > Hi Klaus, > > > > On 6/2/2022 6:50 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > > > On 6/2/22 10:21, Klaus Jensen wrote: > > > > > > > > There is an outstanding issue with the SLAVE_ADDR_RX_MATCH interrupt bit > > > > (bit 7). Remember from my first series I had a workaround to make sure > > > > it wasnt masked. > > > > > > > > I posted this upstream to linux > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220602054842.122271-1-...@irrelevant.dk/ > > > > > > > > Not sure if that is the right way to fix it. > > > > > > That's weird. I would have thought it was already enabled [ Adding Jae ] > > > > Slave mode support in Aspeed I2C driver is already enabled and it has > > worked well so far. The fix Klaus made in the link is incorrect. > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220602054842.122271-1-...@irrelevant.dk/ > > > > The patch is adding ASPEED_I2CD_INTR_SLAVE_MATCH as a mask bit for > > I2CD0C (Interrupt Control Register) but actually this bit is part of > > I2CD10 (Interrupt Status Register). Means that the slave match interrupt > > can be enabled without enabling any mask bit in I2CD0C. > > Thanks Jae. > > So we should enable this interrupt always independently of the > Interrupt Control Register value. > > I would simply extend the mask value (bus->regs[intr_ctrl_reg]) > with the SLAVE_ADDR_RX_MATCH bit when interrupts are raised in > aspeed_i2c_bus_raise_interrupt(). >
Alright, so my "workaround" from v1 was actually the right fix - I'll re-add it ;)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
