On 02-Mar-17 14:33, Jarkko Nikula wrote:

On 03/01/17 17:59, Luis Oliveira wrote:

quoted

- Changes in Kconfig to enable I2C_DESIGNWARE_SLAVE support
- Slave functions added to core library file
- Slave abort sources added to common source file
- New driver: i2c-designware-slave added
- Changes in the Makefile to compile the I2C_DESIGNWARE_SLAVE module
  when supported by the architecture.

All the SLAVE flow is added but it is not enabled via platform
driver.

Signed-off-by: Luis Oliveira <redacted>
---
V5->V6
- Enable Slave mode using a different option (kbuild reported an error)
- Identation fixes needed
- Changed debug prints to dev_vdbg
- Fixed slave enumeration

 drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig                 |  14 +-
 drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile                |   1 +
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c |   7 +
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h   |   3 +
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c  | 403 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 427 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c

...

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c

b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c
index 6357c7c78f6d..24641635aa20 100644

--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c

@@ -56,6 +56,13 @@ static char *abort_sources[] = {
         "trying to use disabled adapter",
     [ARB_LOST] =
         "lost arbitration",
+    [ABRT_SLAVE_FLUSH_TXFIFO] =
+        "read command so flush old data in the TX FIFO",
+    [ABRT_SLAVE_ARBLOST] =
+        "slave lost the bus while transmitting data to a remote master",
+    [ABRT_SLAVE_RD_INTX] =
+        "slave request for data to be transmitted and there is a 1 in "
+        "bit 8 of IC_DATA_CMD",
 };

I know ABRT_SLAVE_RD_INTX case is from the specification but I would prefer here
one-line error text so it will be easier to grep from sources.

I would like it to be also be more understandable. I don't know did I understood
it correctly but does it occur when attempting to read controller while
transmitting or something like that?

It happens in the "slave-transmitter" mode, when the processor side responds to
a request for data to be transmitted and at the same time someone writes 1 to
the bit 8 of the IC_DATA_CMD. This bit in "slave-transmitter" mode has to be "0"
to indicate the data is to be transmitted.

In "slave-receiver" mode it has no purpose since writes to this register are not
required.

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h

b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h
index b620d76ffc8d..6c70945cccea 100644

--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h

@@ -277,6 +277,7 @@ struct dw_i2c_dev {
     void            (*disable)(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev);
     void            (*disable_int)(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev);
     int            (*init)(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev);
+    bool            mode;
 };

As I mentioned add here comment for "mode" not in patch 4/6.

Ok, I will.
Thanks.