| Message ID | 20190507080225.108000-2-sean@geanix.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:02:25 +0200 Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> wrote: > This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because > our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device > to the SoC. > > Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> Hi Sean A small question on the size of the buffer needed inline. Otherwise looks good to me. > --- > drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c > index 1ca69598678f..65ab853202de 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c > @@ -40,8 +40,11 @@ > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/delay.h> > +#include <linux/iio/buffer.h> > #include <linux/iio/iio.h> > #include <linux/iio/sysfs.h> > +#include <linux/iio/trigger_consumer.h> > +#include <linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h> > #include <linux/pm.h> > #include <linux/regmap.h> > #include <linux/bitfield.h> > @@ -945,6 +948,30 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_init_hw_timer(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) > return 0; > } > > +static irqreturn_t st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) > +{ > + struct iio_poll_func *pf = p; > + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev; > + struct st_lsm6dsx_sensor *sensor = iio_priv(indio_dev); > + u16 buffer[4 * sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16)]; The size may well be correct, but that particular way of expressing it doesn't make it terribly clear. It seems a bit large... You need the space for the timestamp, so it needs to be padded to a u64, but that would still require your other channels to need more than 2*sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16) u16s which is 9 or more of them. > + int tmp, bit; > + > + memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer)); > + > + for_each_set_bit(bit, indio_dev->active_scan_mask, indio_dev->masklength) { > + st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot(sensor, > + indio_dev->channels[bit].address, &tmp); > + buffer[bit] = tmp; > + } > + > + iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp(indio_dev, buffer, > + iio_get_time_ns(indio_dev)); > + > + iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); > + > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > +} > + > static int st_lsm6dsx_init_device(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) > { > u8 drdy_int_reg; > @@ -1093,6 +1120,16 @@ int st_lsm6dsx_probe(struct device *dev, int irq, int hw_id, const char *name, > err = st_lsm6dsx_fifo_setup(hw); > if (err < 0) > return err; > + } else { > + for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) { > + err = devm_iio_triggered_buffer_setup(hw->dev, > + hw->iio_devs[i], NULL, > + st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler, NULL); > + if (err < 0) { > + dev_err(hw->dev, "iio triggered buffer setup failed\n"); > + return err; > + } > + } > } > > for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) {
> On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:02:25 +0200 > Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> wrote: > > > This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because > > our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device > > to the SoC. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> > Hi Sean > > A small question on the size of the buffer needed inline. Otherwise looks > good to me. Hi Sean, this patch does not make sense to me since running st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot you need to wait to power up the device (and you will power it down at the end). I guess you will not be able to read at a given ODR (e.g. 416Hz). Moreover you can't read from the hw fifo without the irq line since you need to read a full pattern from it in order to maintain the alignment. From my point of view you have 2 possibility: - poll the output registers from userspace (this is what you are actually doing from inside the kernel, what is the advantage of doing so?) - fix the hw bug Moreover if I read the patch correctly it has a NULL pointer dereference bug since hw->iio_devs[i] can be NULL (e.g. if sensor hub is disabled) Regards, Lorenzo > > --- > > drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c > > index 1ca69598678f..65ab853202de 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c > > +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c > > @@ -40,8 +40,11 @@ > > #include <linux/kernel.h> > > #include <linux/module.h> > > #include <linux/delay.h> > > +#include <linux/iio/buffer.h> > > #include <linux/iio/iio.h> > > #include <linux/iio/sysfs.h> > > +#include <linux/iio/trigger_consumer.h> > > +#include <linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h> > > #include <linux/pm.h> > > #include <linux/regmap.h> > > #include <linux/bitfield.h> > > @@ -945,6 +948,30 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_init_hw_timer(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static irqreturn_t st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) > > +{ > > + struct iio_poll_func *pf = p; > > + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev; > > + struct st_lsm6dsx_sensor *sensor = iio_priv(indio_dev); > > + u16 buffer[4 * sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16)]; > The size may well be correct, but that particular way of expressing it doesn't make > it terribly clear. > > It seems a bit large... You need the space for the timestamp, so it needs to be > padded to a u64, but that would still require your other channels to need > more than 2*sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16) u16s which is 9 or more of them. > > > + int tmp, bit; > > + > > + memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer)); > > + > > + for_each_set_bit(bit, indio_dev->active_scan_mask, indio_dev->masklength) { > > + st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot(sensor, > > + indio_dev->channels[bit].address, &tmp); > > + buffer[bit] = tmp; > > + } > > + > > + iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp(indio_dev, buffer, > > + iio_get_time_ns(indio_dev)); > > + > > + iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); > > + > > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > > +} > > + > > static int st_lsm6dsx_init_device(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) > > { > > u8 drdy_int_reg; > > @@ -1093,6 +1120,16 @@ int st_lsm6dsx_probe(struct device *dev, int irq, int hw_id, const char *name, > > err = st_lsm6dsx_fifo_setup(hw); > > if (err < 0) > > return err; > > + } else { > > + for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) { > > + err = devm_iio_triggered_buffer_setup(hw->dev, > > + hw->iio_devs[i], NULL, > > + st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler, NULL); I guess hw->iio_devs[i] can be NULL here > > + if (err < 0) { > > + dev_err(hw->dev, "iio triggered buffer setup failed\n"); > > + return err; > > + } > > + } > > } > > > > for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) { >
On 11/05/2019 13.37, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:02:25 +0200 > Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> wrote: > >> This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because >> our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device >> to the SoC. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> > Hi Sean > > A small question on the size of the buffer needed inline. Otherwise looks > good to me. >> --- >> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c >> index 1ca69598678f..65ab853202de 100644 >> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c >> @@ -40,8 +40,11 @@ >> #include <linux/kernel.h> >> #include <linux/module.h> >> #include <linux/delay.h> >> +#include <linux/iio/buffer.h> >> #include <linux/iio/iio.h> >> #include <linux/iio/sysfs.h> >> +#include <linux/iio/trigger_consumer.h> >> +#include <linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h> >> #include <linux/pm.h> >> #include <linux/regmap.h> >> #include <linux/bitfield.h> >> @@ -945,6 +948,30 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_init_hw_timer(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static irqreturn_t st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) >> +{ >> + struct iio_poll_func *pf = p; >> + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev; >> + struct st_lsm6dsx_sensor *sensor = iio_priv(indio_dev); >> + u16 buffer[4 * sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16)]; > The size may well be correct, but that particular way of expressing it doesn't make > it terribly clear. > > It seems a bit large... You need the space for the timestamp, so it needs to be > padded to a u64, but that would still require your other channels to need > more than 2*sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16) u16s which is 9 or more of them. Right now we have u16[16], so that quite at bit large :-) So maybe something like: /* 3x s16 + 1x s16(padding) + 1x s64 timestamp */ u16 buffer[2 * sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16)]; Would do it? > >> + int tmp, bit; >> + >> + memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer)); >> + >> + for_each_set_bit(bit, indio_dev->active_scan_mask, indio_dev->masklength) { >> + st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot(sensor, >> + indio_dev->channels[bit].address, &tmp); >> + buffer[bit] = tmp; >> + } As you pointed out in the "[PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: ti-ads8688: save values correct in buffer" When taking this approach it will not shift down. >> + >> + iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp(indio_dev, buffer, >> + iio_get_time_ns(indio_dev)); >> + >> + iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); >> + >> + return IRQ_HANDLED; >> +} >> + >> static int st_lsm6dsx_init_device(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) >> { >> u8 drdy_int_reg; >> @@ -1093,6 +1120,16 @@ int st_lsm6dsx_probe(struct device *dev, int irq, int hw_id, const char *name, >> err = st_lsm6dsx_fifo_setup(hw); >> if (err < 0) >> return err; >> + } else { >> + for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) { >> + err = devm_iio_triggered_buffer_setup(hw->dev, >> + hw->iio_devs[i], NULL, >> + st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler, NULL); >> + if (err < 0) { >> + dev_err(hw->dev, "iio triggered buffer setup failed\n"); >> + return err; >> + } >> + } >> } >> >> for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) { >
On 11/05/2019 14.30, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: >> On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:02:25 +0200 >> Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> wrote: >> >>> This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because >>> our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device >>> to the SoC. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> >> Hi Sean >> >> A small question on the size of the buffer needed inline. Otherwise looks >> good to me. > > Hi Sean, > > this patch does not make sense to me since running st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot > you need to wait to power up the device (and you will power it down at the > end). I guess you will not be able to read at a given ODR (e.g. 416Hz). > Moreover you can't read from the hw fifo without the irq line since > you need to read a full pattern from it in order to maintain the alignment. We are not using the hw fifo if the hw irq isn't present... So if I understand correctly we could speed things up a bit, with leaving the sensor powered by implementing a new reading function and calling st_lsm6dsx_sensor_set_enable when we enable the trigger? > From my point of view you have 2 possibility: > - poll the output registers from userspace (this is what you are actually > doing from inside the kernel, what is the advantage of doing so?) Yes this is exactly what I'm trying to accomplish here. It would be nice for us to have the same hrtimer/trigger to sample this and our adc. > - fix the hw bug Not possible on +20K devices. ;-) > > Moreover if I read the patch correctly it has a NULL pointer dereference bug > since hw->iio_devs[i] can be NULL (e.g. if sensor hub is disabled) Right above, there is: if (!hw->iio_devs[i]) return -ENOMEM; Should be enough... > > Regards, > Lorenzo > BR /Sean
> On 11/05/2019 14.30, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:02:25 +0200 > > > Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> wrote: > > > > > > > This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because > > > > our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device > > > > to the SoC. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> > > > Hi Sean > > > > > > A small question on the size of the buffer needed inline. Otherwise looks > > > good to me. > > > > Hi Sean, > > > > this patch does not make sense to me since running st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot > > you need to wait to power up the device (and you will power it down at the > > end). I guess you will not be able to read at a given ODR (e.g. 416Hz). > > Moreover you can't read from the hw fifo without the irq line since > > you need to read a full pattern from it in order to maintain the alignment. > We are not using the hw fifo if the hw irq isn't present... > So if I understand correctly we could speed things up a bit, with leaving > the sensor powered by implementing a new reading function and > calling st_lsm6dsx_sensor_set_enable when we enable the trigger? I do not think so since in this way you will not know when the hw has updated the output registers > > > From my point of view you have 2 possibility: > > - poll the output registers from userspace (this is what you are actually > > doing from inside the kernel, what is the advantage of doing so?) > Yes this is exactly what I'm trying to accomplish here. > It would be nice for us to have the same hrtimer/trigger to sample this and > our adc. Since we need to wait the data to be ready there is no difference between reading them polling the output registers in the sysfs and doing so > > > - fix the hw bug > Not possible on +20K devices. ;-) > > > > > Moreover if I read the patch correctly it has a NULL pointer dereference bug > > since hw->iio_devs[i] can be NULL (e.g. if sensor hub is disabled) > Right above, there is: > if (!hw->iio_devs[i]) > return -ENOMEM; > > Should be enough... Do you mean when we alloc hw->iio_devs[]? If so the for loop stops at ST_LSM6DSX_ID_EXT0 while you are going through the complete list here (ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX)... > > > > Regards, > > Lorenzo > > What I think can be doable is to read data trough the hw fifo but use the iio hr timer as trigger. We need to set the hr timer timeout according to the pattern len and read the complete pattern. I am not 100% sure it will work since read accesses and data generation are asynchronous (so there will be a drift). @Jonathan, Denis: can it work? Regards, Lorenzo > > BR > /Sean
Please ignore this patchset. The IRQ is indeed connected to our SoC /Sean
On Sat, 11 May 2019 19:00:41 +0200 Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 11/05/2019 14.30, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:02:25 +0200 > > > > Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because > > > > > our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device > > > > > to the SoC. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> > > > > Hi Sean > > > > > > > > A small question on the size of the buffer needed inline. Otherwise looks > > > > good to me. > > > > > > Hi Sean, > > > > > > this patch does not make sense to me since running st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot > > > you need to wait to power up the device (and you will power it down at the > > > end). I guess you will not be able to read at a given ODR (e.g. 416Hz). > > > Moreover you can't read from the hw fifo without the irq line since > > > you need to read a full pattern from it in order to maintain the alignment. > > We are not using the hw fifo if the hw irq isn't present... > > So if I understand correctly we could speed things up a bit, with leaving > > the sensor powered by implementing a new reading function and > > calling st_lsm6dsx_sensor_set_enable when we enable the trigger? > > I do not think so since in this way you will not know when the hw has updated > the output registers > > > > > > From my point of view you have 2 possibility: > > > - poll the output registers from userspace (this is what you are actually > > > doing from inside the kernel, what is the advantage of doing so?) > > Yes this is exactly what I'm trying to accomplish here. > > It would be nice for us to have the same hrtimer/trigger to sample this and > > our adc. > > Since we need to wait the data to be ready there is no difference between reading > them polling the output registers in the sysfs and doing so > > > > > > - fix the hw bug > > Not possible on +20K devices. ;-) > > > > > > > > Moreover if I read the patch correctly it has a NULL pointer dereference bug > > > since hw->iio_devs[i] can be NULL (e.g. if sensor hub is disabled) > > Right above, there is: > > if (!hw->iio_devs[i]) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > Should be enough... > > Do you mean when we alloc hw->iio_devs[]? If so the for loop stops at > ST_LSM6DSX_ID_EXT0 while you are going through the complete list here > (ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX)... > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Lorenzo > > > > > What I think can be doable is to read data trough the hw fifo but use > the iio hr timer as trigger. We need to set the hr timer timeout according to > the pattern len and read the complete pattern. I am not 100% sure it will work > since read accesses and data generation are asynchronous (so there will be a > drift). > @Jonathan, Denis: can it work? Usual nasty trick to this is you read the fifo faster than you in theory need to. I wouldn't use the hr timer trigger for this though as it adds apparent semantics that aren't true. So spin a timer up inside the driver. If you aren't using the fifo you can also do a higher efficiency check by polling the status registers at twice the rate of of expected data generation. When they are all set you read. So basically you poll in the interrupt line by reading the registers it reflects. There are device variants out there where there is an interrupt pin on the die but it doesn't reach the edge of the package. In those cases we always have to use hacks like this. Anyhow, seems no actual need for this. I just wanted to put some comments in here for the future! Jonathan > > Regards, > Lorenzo > > > > > > BR > > /Sean >
diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c index 1ca69598678f..65ab853202de 100644 --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c @@ -40,8 +40,11 @@ #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/delay.h> +#include <linux/iio/buffer.h> #include <linux/iio/iio.h> #include <linux/iio/sysfs.h> +#include <linux/iio/trigger_consumer.h> +#include <linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h> #include <linux/pm.h> #include <linux/regmap.h> #include <linux/bitfield.h> @@ -945,6 +948,30 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_init_hw_timer(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) return 0; } +static irqreturn_t st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) +{ + struct iio_poll_func *pf = p; + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev; + struct st_lsm6dsx_sensor *sensor = iio_priv(indio_dev); + u16 buffer[4 * sizeof(s64)/sizeof(u16)]; + int tmp, bit; + + memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer)); + + for_each_set_bit(bit, indio_dev->active_scan_mask, indio_dev->masklength) { + st_lsm6dsx_read_oneshot(sensor, + indio_dev->channels[bit].address, &tmp); + buffer[bit] = tmp; + } + + iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp(indio_dev, buffer, + iio_get_time_ns(indio_dev)); + + iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); + + return IRQ_HANDLED; +} + static int st_lsm6dsx_init_device(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw) { u8 drdy_int_reg; @@ -1093,6 +1120,16 @@ int st_lsm6dsx_probe(struct device *dev, int irq, int hw_id, const char *name, err = st_lsm6dsx_fifo_setup(hw); if (err < 0) return err; + } else { + for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) { + err = devm_iio_triggered_buffer_setup(hw->dev, + hw->iio_devs[i], NULL, + st_lsm6dsx_trigger_handler, NULL); + if (err < 0) { + dev_err(hw->dev, "iio triggered buffer setup failed\n"); + return err; + } + } } for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_ID_MAX; i++) {
This adds support for using iio triggers, this is needed because our hardware guys forgot to connect the irq pins from imu device to the SoC. Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com> --- drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)