[Sorry, for the resend, I didn't pay attention and used Mark's old
email address]
2013/11/5 Richard Genoud <richard.gen...@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> As I was coding something like this:
> static struct spi_ioc_transfer *xfer;
> struct spi_frame *rx_frame;
> xfer = calloc(nb, sizeof(*xfer));
>
> for (i = 0; i < nb; i++) {
> xfer[i].tx_buf = (unsigned long)tx_buf;
> xfer[i].rx_buf = (unsigned long)rx_buf;
> xfer[i].len = 0;
> }
>
> err = ioctl(spi_data->fd, SPI_IOC_MESSAGE(nb), xfer);
> I ran into a bug in spi-atmel.c
>
> NB: The zero-length SPI message was not intentional, it was just a bug in my
> software.
>
> [ 13.593750] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.601562] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.601562] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.609375] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.617187] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.625000] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.632812] spidev spi1.1: xfer len 0 rx tx cs 8bits 150 usec 18000000Hz
> [ 13.632812] atmel_spi f0004000.spi: new message c7b49ec4 submitted for
> spi1.1
> [ 13.632812] atmel_spi f0004000.spi: start message c7b49ec4 for spi1.1
> [ 13.632812] spidev spi1.1: activate 16, mr 000d0031
> [ 13.632812] atmel_spi f0004000.spi: atmel_spi_next_xfer_pio
> [ 13.632812] atmel_spi f0004000.spi: start pio xfer c79d80c0: len 0 tx
> c6e00000 rx c6e00000 bitpw 8
> [ 13.632812] irq 29: nobody cared (try booting with the "irqpoll" option)
> [ 13.632812] CPU: 0 PID: 494 Comm: multichannel Not tainted 3.11.2 #1
> [ 13.632812] [<c0012e20>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xe0) from [<c0010bb8>]
> (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> [ 13.632812] [<c0010bb8>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) from [<c004d5b4>]
> (__report_bad_irq+0x1c/0xb4)
> [ 13.632812] [<c004d5b4>] (__report_bad_irq+0x1c/0xb4) from [<c004d9ac>]
> (note_interrupt+0x178/0x234)
> [ 13.632812] [<c004d9ac>] (note_interrupt+0x178/0x234) from [<c004c078>]
> (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x170/0x1a0)
> [ 13.632812] [<c004c078>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x170/0x1a0) from
> [<c004c0d0>] (handle_irq_event+0x28/0x38)
> [ 13.632812] [<c004c0d0>] (handle_irq_event+0x28/0x38) from [<c004e57c>]
> (handle_fasteoi_irq+0xa4/0xe4)
> [ 13.632812] [<c004e57c>] (handle_fasteoi_irq+0xa4/0xe4) from [<c004b910>]
> (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30)
> [ 13.632812] [<c004b910>] (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30) from [<c000f3e8>]
> (handle_IRQ+0x60/0x84)
> [ 13.632812] [<c000f3e8>] (handle_IRQ+0x60/0x84) from [<c00115e0>]
> (__irq_svc+0x40/0x4c)
> [ 13.632812] [<c00115e0>] (__irq_svc+0x40/0x4c) from [<bf1293dc>]
> (spidev_sync+0x6c/0x94 [spidev])
> [ 13.632812] [<bf1293dc>] (spidev_sync+0x6c/0x94 [spidev]) from
> [<bf129b24>] (spidev_ioctl+0x53c/0x66c [spidev])
> [ 13.632812] [<bf129b24>] (spidev_ioctl+0x53c/0x66c [spidev]) from
> [<c0087730>] (vfs_ioctl+0x28/0x3c)
> [ 13.632812] [<c0087730>] (vfs_ioctl+0x28/0x3c) from [<c0088158>]
> (do_vfs_ioctl+0x4e8/0x54c)
> [ 13.632812] [<c0088158>] (do_vfs_ioctl+0x4e8/0x54c) from [<c00881f0>]
> (SyS_ioctl+0x34/0x58)
> [ 13.632812] [<c00881f0>] (SyS_ioctl+0x34/0x58) from [<c000e500>]
> (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x2c)
> [ 13.632812] handlers:
> [ 13.632812] [<bf01142c>] atmel_spi_pio_interrupt [spi_atmel]
> [ 13.632812] Disabling IRQ #29
>
> And that make me wonder what was the behavior to adopt in case of a
> zero-length transfer ?
> Should spidev.c just return ok without doing anything ? Should it return
> -EINVAL ?
> Or maybe we should activate/deactivate the chip select ?
>
>
> Best regards,
> Richard.
--
for me, ck means con kolivas and not calvin klein... does it mean I'm a geek ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
