Re: PS/2 + i8042 intermixing commands
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Date: 2020-08-13 01:21:35
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 09:28:41AM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote:
quoted
<- atkbd_event_work->atkbd_set_leds [KB recv data: 0xed] # CMD 10 <- Wait, where is the data? <- Continuation of i8042_port_close? [KB recv cmd: 0x60] # CMD #14 [KB recv data: 0x43] [KB eaten by STATE_WRITE_CMD_BYTE: 0x43] [KB set CTR_RAM(0x00)=0x43 (old:0x41)] [AUX IRQ enable] <- Here is the data! [KB recv data: 0x00] # CMD 10 (data) [KB Unsupported i8042 data 0x00] [KB recv data: 0x00] <- Did the host retry? [KB Unsupported i8042 data 0x00] <- atkbd_event_work->atkbd_set_repeat_rate [KB recv data: 0xf3] # CMD #11 [KB recv data: 0x00] [KB eaten by STATE_SETREP: 0x00] [KB recv cmd: 0xd4] # CMD #15 [KB recv data: 0xf2] [STATE_SEND_TO_MOUSE: 0xf2]As you can see CMD #10 starts between #13 and #14, and then completes after #14. Is this expected behavior? I'm not quite sure if #13 and #14 are coming from i8042_port_close. I don't have a function trace available, but it seems to fit. I found this comment: /* * Writers to AUX and KBD ports as well as users issuing i8042_command * directly should acquire i8042_mutex (by means of calling * i8042_lock_chip() and i8042_unlock_ship() helpers) to ensure that * they do not disturb each other (unfortunately in many i8042 * implementations write to one of the ports will immediately abort * command that is being processed by another port). */ static DEFINE_MUTEX(i8042_mutex); Does that not mean that i8042_port_close, i8042_enable_kbd_port, i8042_enable_aux_port, + any other function that calls i8042_command should be taking the lock before calling i8042_command?
Yeah, I think this is right. When I added the mutex it was because 2 deices were clashing with each other and I did not consider that closing port in the i8042 driver itself may also disturb in-flight command. Thanks. -- Dmitry