As show in I2C specification:
- Standard-mode: the minimum HIGH period of the scl clock is 4.0us
the minimum LOW period of the scl clock is 4.7us
- Fast-mode: the minimum HIGH period of the scl clock is 0.6us
the minimum LOW period of the scl clock is 1.3us
I have measured i2c SCL waveforms in fast-mode by oscilloscope
on rk3288-pinky board. the LOW period of the scl clock is 1.3us.
It is so critical that we must adjust LOW division to increase
the LOW period of the scl clock.
Thanks Doug for the suggestion about division formulas.
Signed-off-by: Addy Ke <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v2:
- remove Fast-mode plus and HS-mode
- use new formulas suggested by Doug
Changes in V3:
- use new formulas (sep 30) suggested by Doug
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c | 135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 128 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c
index b41d979..9612eba 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
#include <linux/wait.h>
#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
#include <linux/regmap.h>
+#include <linux/math64.h>
/* Register Map */
@@ -428,18 +429,138 @@ out:
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
+static void rk3x_i2c_calc_divs(unsigned long i2c_rate, unsigned long scl_rate,
+ unsigned long *div_low, unsigned long *div_high)
+{
+ unsigned long min_low_ns, min_high_ns;
+ unsigned long max_data_hold_ns;
+ unsigned long data_hold_buffer_ns;
+ unsigned long max_low_ns, min_total_ns;
+
+ unsigned long i2c_rate_khz, scl_rate_khz;
+
+ unsigned long min_low_div, min_high_div;
+ unsigned long max_low_div;
+
+ unsigned long min_div_for_hold, min_total_div;
+ unsigned long extra_div, extra_low_div, ideal_low_div;
+
+ /* Only support standard-mode and fast-mode */
+ WARN_ON(scl_rate > 400000);
+
+ /*
+ * min_low_ns: The minimum number of ns we need to hold low
+ * to meet i2c spec
+ * min_high_ns: The minimum number of ns we need to hold high
+ * to meet i2c spec
+ * max_low_ns: The maximum number of ns we can hold low
+ * to meet i2c spec
+ *
+ * Note: max_low_ns should be (max data hold time * 2 - buffer)
+ * This is because the i2c host on Rockchip holds the data line
+ * for half the low time.
+ */
+ if (scl_rate <= 100000) {
+ min_low_ns = 4700;
+ min_high_ns = 4000;
+ max_data_hold_ns = 3450;
+ data_hold_buffer_ns = 50;
+ } else {
+ min_low_ns = 1300;
+ min_high_ns = 600;
+ max_data_hold_ns = 900;
+ data_hold_buffer_ns = 50;
+ }
+ max_low_ns = max_data_hold_ns * 2 - data_hold_buffer_ns;
+ min_total_ns = min_low_ns + min_high_ns;
+
+ /* Adjust to avoid overflow */
+ i2c_rate_khz = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate, 1000);
+ scl_rate_khz = DIV_ROUND_UP(scl_rate, 1000);
+
+ /*
+ * We need the total div to be >= this number
+ * so we don't clock too fast.
+ */
+ min_total_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz, scl_rate_khz * 8);
+
+ /* These are the min dividers needed for min hold times.*/
+ min_low_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz * min_low_ns, 8 * 1000000);
+ min_high_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz * min_high_ns, 8 * 1000000);
+ min_div_for_hold = (min_low_div + min_high_div);
+
+ /*
+ * This is the maximum divider so we don't go over the max.
+ * We don't round up here (we round down) since this is a max.
+ */
+ max_low_div = i2c_rate_khz * max_low_ns / (8 * 1000000);
+
+ if (min_low_div > max_low_div)
+ max_low_div = min_low_div;
+
+ if (min_div_for_hold > min_total_div) {
+ /*
+ * Time needed to meet hold requirements is important.
+ * Just use that.
+ */
+ *div_low = min_low_div;
+ *div_high = min_high_div;
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * We've got to distribute some time among the low and high
+ * so we don't run too fast.
+ */
+ extra_div = min_total_div - min_div_for_hold;
+ /*
+ * We'll try to split things up perfectly evenly,
+ * biasing slightly towards having a higher div
+ * for low (spend more time low).
+ */
+
+ ideal_low_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz * min_low_ns,
+ scl_rate_khz * 8 * min_total_ns);
+
+ /* Don't allow it to go over the max */
+ if (ideal_low_div > max_low_div)
+ ideal_low_div = max_low_div;
+
+ /* Handle when the ideal low div is going to take up
+ * more than we have.
+ */
+ if (ideal_low_div > min_low_div + extra_div)
+ ideal_low_div = min_low_div + extra_div;
+
+ /* Give low the "ideal" and give high whatever extra is left */
+ extra_low_div = ideal_low_div - min_low_div;
+ *div_low = ideal_low_div;
+ *div_high = min_high_div + (extra_div - extra_low_div);
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Adjust to the fact that the hardware has an implicit "+1".
+ * NOTE: Above calculations always produce div_low > 0 and div_high > 0.
+ */
+ *div_low = *div_low - 1;
+ *div_high = *div_high - 1;
+}
+
static void rk3x_i2c_set_scl_rate(struct rk3x_i2c *i2c, unsigned long scl_rate)
{
unsigned long i2c_rate = clk_get_rate(i2c->clk);
- unsigned int div;
+ unsigned long div_low, div_high;
+ u64 t_low_ns, t_high_ns;
- /* set DIV = DIVH = DIVL
- * SCL rate = (clk rate) / (8 * (DIVH + 1 + DIVL + 1))
- * = (clk rate) / (16 * (DIV + 1))
- */
- div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate, scl_rate * 16) - 1;
+ rk3x_i2c_calc_divs(i2c_rate, scl_rate, &div_low, &div_high);
+
+ i2c_writel(i2c, (div_high << 16) | (div_low & 0xffff), REG_CLKDIV);
- i2c_writel(i2c, (div << 16) | (div & 0xffff), REG_CLKDIV);
+ t_low_ns = div_u64(((u64)div_low + 1) * 8 * 1000000000, i2c_rate);
+ t_high_ns = div_u64(((u64)div_high + 1) * 8 * 1000000000, i2c_rate);
+ dev_dbg(i2c->dev,
+ "CLK %lukhz, Req %luns, Act low %lluns high %lluns\n",
+ i2c_rate / 1000,
+ 1000000000 / scl_rate,
+ t_low_ns, t_high_ns);
}
/**
--
1.8.3.2
Addy,
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Addy Ke <[email protected]> wrote:
> As show in I2C specification:
> - Standard-mode: the minimum HIGH period of the scl clock is 4.0us
> the minimum LOW period of the scl clock is 4.7us
> - Fast-mode: the minimum HIGH period of the scl clock is 0.6us
> the minimum LOW period of the scl clock is 1.3us
>
> I have measured i2c SCL waveforms in fast-mode by oscilloscope
> on rk3288-pinky board. the LOW period of the scl clock is 1.3us.
> It is so critical that we must adjust LOW division to increase
> the LOW period of the scl clock.
>
> Thanks Doug for the suggestion about division formulas.
>
> Signed-off-by: Addy Ke <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - remove Fast-mode plus and HS-mode
> - use new formulas suggested by Doug
> Changes in V3:
> - use new formulas (sep 30) suggested by Doug
>
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c | 135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 128 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c
> index b41d979..9612eba 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rk3x.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> #include <linux/wait.h>
> #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
> #include <linux/regmap.h>
> +#include <linux/math64.h>
>
>
> /* Register Map */
> @@ -428,18 +429,138 @@ out:
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> +static void rk3x_i2c_calc_divs(unsigned long i2c_rate, unsigned long scl_rate,
> + unsigned long *div_low, unsigned long *div_high)
> +{
> + unsigned long min_low_ns, min_high_ns;
> + unsigned long max_data_hold_ns;
> + unsigned long data_hold_buffer_ns;
> + unsigned long max_low_ns, min_total_ns;
> +
> + unsigned long i2c_rate_khz, scl_rate_khz;
> +
> + unsigned long min_low_div, min_high_div;
> + unsigned long max_low_div;
> +
> + unsigned long min_div_for_hold, min_total_div;
> + unsigned long extra_div, extra_low_div, ideal_low_div;
> +
> + /* Only support standard-mode and fast-mode */
> + WARN_ON(scl_rate > 400000);
> +
> + /*
> + * min_low_ns: The minimum number of ns we need to hold low
> + * to meet i2c spec
> + * min_high_ns: The minimum number of ns we need to hold high
> + * to meet i2c spec
> + * max_low_ns: The maximum number of ns we can hold low
> + * to meet i2c spec
> + *
> + * Note: max_low_ns should be (max data hold time * 2 - buffer)
> + * This is because the i2c host on Rockchip holds the data line
> + * for half the low time.
> + */
> + if (scl_rate <= 100000) {
> + min_low_ns = 4700;
> + min_high_ns = 4000;
> + max_data_hold_ns = 3450;
> + data_hold_buffer_ns = 50;
> + } else {
> + min_low_ns = 1300;
> + min_high_ns = 600;
> + max_data_hold_ns = 900;
> + data_hold_buffer_ns = 50;
> + }
> + max_low_ns = max_data_hold_ns * 2 - data_hold_buffer_ns;
> + min_total_ns = min_low_ns + min_high_ns;
> +
> + /* Adjust to avoid overflow */
> + i2c_rate_khz = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate, 1000);
> + scl_rate_khz = DIV_ROUND_UP(scl_rate, 1000);
> +
> + /*
> + * We need the total div to be >= this number
> + * so we don't clock too fast.
> + */
> + min_total_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz, scl_rate_khz * 8);
> +
> + /* These are the min dividers needed for min hold times.*/
nit: a space before the "*" in the comment.
> + min_low_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz * min_low_ns, 8 * 1000000);
> + min_high_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz * min_high_ns, 8 * 1000000);
> + min_div_for_hold = (min_low_div + min_high_div);
> +
> + /*
> + * This is the maximum divider so we don't go over the max.
> + * We don't round up here (we round down) since this is a max.
> + */
> + max_low_div = i2c_rate_khz * max_low_ns / (8 * 1000000);
> +
> + if (min_low_div > max_low_div)
It feels like we should print some sort of warning here. Maybe WARN_ONCE?
> + max_low_div = min_low_div;
> +
> + if (min_div_for_hold > min_total_div) {
> + /*
> + * Time needed to meet hold requirements is important.
> + * Just use that.
> + */
> + *div_low = min_low_div;
> + *div_high = min_high_div;
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * We've got to distribute some time among the low and high
> + * so we don't run too fast.
> + */
> + extra_div = min_total_div - min_div_for_hold;
> + /*
> + * We'll try to split things up perfectly evenly,
> + * biasing slightly towards having a higher div
> + * for low (spend more time low).
> + */
> +
nit: The comment above should probably be next to the line below, not
to the line above it.
> + ideal_low_div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate_khz * min_low_ns,
> + scl_rate_khz * 8 * min_total_ns);
> +
> + /* Don't allow it to go over the max */
> + if (ideal_low_div > max_low_div)
> + ideal_low_div = max_low_div;
> +
> + /* Handle when the ideal low div is going to take up
> + * more than we have.
> + */
nit: above comment had the wrong style still
> + if (ideal_low_div > min_low_div + extra_div)
> + ideal_low_div = min_low_div + extra_div;
> +
> + /* Give low the "ideal" and give high whatever extra is left */
> + extra_low_div = ideal_low_div - min_low_div;
> + *div_low = ideal_low_div;
> + *div_high = min_high_div + (extra_div - extra_low_div);
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Adjust to the fact that the hardware has an implicit "+1".
> + * NOTE: Above calculations always produce div_low > 0 and div_high > 0.
> + */
> + *div_low = *div_low - 1;
> + *div_high = *div_high - 1;
> +}
> +
> static void rk3x_i2c_set_scl_rate(struct rk3x_i2c *i2c, unsigned long scl_rate)
> {
> unsigned long i2c_rate = clk_get_rate(i2c->clk);
> - unsigned int div;
> + unsigned long div_low, div_high;
> + u64 t_low_ns, t_high_ns;
>
> - /* set DIV = DIVH = DIVL
> - * SCL rate = (clk rate) / (8 * (DIVH + 1 + DIVL + 1))
> - * = (clk rate) / (16 * (DIV + 1))
> - */
> - div = DIV_ROUND_UP(i2c_rate, scl_rate * 16) - 1;
> + rk3x_i2c_calc_divs(i2c_rate, scl_rate, &div_low, &div_high);
> +
> + i2c_writel(i2c, (div_high << 16) | (div_low & 0xffff), REG_CLKDIV);
>
> - i2c_writel(i2c, (div << 16) | (div & 0xffff), REG_CLKDIV);
> + t_low_ns = div_u64(((u64)div_low + 1) * 8 * 1000000000, i2c_rate);
> + t_high_ns = div_u64(((u64)div_high + 1) * 8 * 1000000000, i2c_rate);
> + dev_dbg(i2c->dev,
> + "CLK %lukhz, Req %luns, Act low %lluns high %lluns\n",
> + i2c_rate / 1000,
> + 1000000000 / scl_rate,
> + t_low_ns, t_high_ns);
> }
>
> /**
All of my comments are just nits and this appears to match the python
script I sent out exactly. I guess that means you're happy with these
formulas now. :) Hopefully others (Max, Wolfram?) can take a look at
this now and see what they think. It's definitely long but I think it
should give us the best numbers we can get (and most of the length is
all the comments).
Maybe you can send up a v4 that addresses nits? After nits:
Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <[email protected]>
I've tested this on my rk3288 board and i2c still seems to work fine
at 400kHz. I haven't scoped it myself, but I trust that you have.
Tested-by: Doug Anderson <[email protected]>