Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200521110910.45518-1-tali.perry1@gmail.com> <20200521110910.45518-3-tali.perry1@gmail.com>
 <20200521142340.GM1634618@smile.fi.intel.com> <20200521143100.GA16812@ninjato>
 <CAHb3i=vcVLWHjdiJoNZQrwJCqzszpOL7e9SAjqObsZCRH4ifwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200521145347.GO1634618@smile.fi.intel.com> <20200521203758.GA20150@ninjato>
In-Reply-To: <20200521203758.GA20150@ninjato>
From:   Tali Perry <tali.perry1@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 May 2020 23:47:18 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHb3i=tF2YF3LbbWRK9buObU-LjWGhxKCwvj2Jtn=VH1p+zDJg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/3] i2c: npcm7xx: Add Nuvoton NPCM I2C controller driver
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Ofer Yehielli <ofery@google.com>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        avifishman70@gmail.com, Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@gmail.com>,
        kfting@nuvoton.com, Patrick Venture <venture@google.com>,
        Nancy Yuen <yuenn@google.com>,
        Benjamin Fair <benjaminfair@google.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
        OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:37 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote:
>
>
> > > > I wondered also about DEBUG_FS entries. I can see their value when
> > > > developing the driver. But since this is done now, do they really h=
elp a
> > > > user to debug a difficult case? I am not sure, and then I wonder if=
 we
> > > > should have that code in upstream. I am open for discussion, though=
.
> > >
> > > The user wanted to have health monitor implemented on top of the driv=
er.
> > > The user has 16 channels connected the multiple devices. All are oper=
ated
> > > using various daemons in the system. Sometimes the slave devices are =
power down.
> > > Therefor the user wanted to track the health status of the devices.
> >
> > Ah, then there are these options I have in mind (Wolfram, FYI as well!)=
:
> > 1) push with debugfs as a temporary solution and convert to devlink hea=
lth protocol [1];
> > 2) drop it and develop devlink_health solution;
> > 3) push debugfs and wait if I=C2=B2C will gain devlink health support
>
> No need for 2). We can push it now and convert it later. That being
> said, I wonder if [1] is suitable for this driver? Things like NACKs and
> timeouts happen regularly on an I2C bus and are not a state of bad
> health.
>

Agree, having a timeout every now and then is not an issue. The user
is interested
in cases when the number of timeouts\BER\nack\recovery are high.