Caution: EXT Email
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 09:39:59AM +0530, Manjunatha Venkatesh wrote:
On 10/7/2022 8:27 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:I do not understand, what "IO handshake"? What is missing from the
Caution: EXT EmailThe IO Handshake needed with SR1XX Family of SOCs cannot use the RAW SPI
On Fri, Oct 07, 2022 at 07:34:25PM +0530, Manjunatha Venkatesh wrote:
On 9/14/2022 8:39 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:Why isn't this just a normal SPI driver and you do the "UCI" commands
Caution: EXT EmailBasically, it is SPI device driver which supports UCI(Ultra-wide band
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022, at 4:29 PM, Manjunatha Venkatesh wrote:
NXP has SR1XX family of UWB Subsystems (UWBS) devices. SR1XX SOCsI know nothing about UWB, so I have no idea if the user interface
are FiRa Compliant. SR1XX SOCs are flash less devices and they need
Firmware Download on every device boot. More details on the SR1XX Family
can be found athttps://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nxp.com%2Fproducts%2F%3AUWB-TRIMENSION&data=05%7C01%7Cmanjunatha.venkatesh%40nxp.com%7C46c5718c03ee429cf57208dad2a3cad7%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C638053898170779252%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=S2BswHaF22edAfiZXEKUwGfUTNi1nuQzQSdGDb26peI%3D&reserved=0
The sr1xx driver work the SR1XX Family of UWBS, and uses UWB Controller
Interface (UCI). The corresponding details are available in the FiRa
Consortium Website (https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.firaconsortium.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cmanjunatha.venkatesh%40nxp.com%7C46c5718c03ee429cf57208dad2a3cad7%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C638053898170779252%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=0fFcimUd6gOxTV0EKS%2BfxRZfrMDg0fytq1eSDmkMZ9E%3D&reserved=0).
you propose here makes sense. My guess is that there is a good chance
that there are other implementations of UWB that would not work
with this specific driver interface, so you probably need a
slightly higher-level abstraction.
We had an older subsystem that was called UWB and that got removed
a while ago:
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.kernel.org%2Fpub%2Fscm%2Flinux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Ftorvalds%2Flinux.git%2Fcommit%2Fdrivers%2Fstaging%2Fuwb%3Fid%3Dcaa6772db4c1deb5d9add48e95d6eab50699ee5e&data=05%7C01%7Cmanjunatha.venkatesh%40nxp.com%7C46c5718c03ee429cf57208dad2a3cad7%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C638053898170779252%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=XXYgofE9LlBCPGW1aKxKUOBEIGF0aQv%2Bh6x6iNATkLQ%3D&reserved=0
Is that the same UWB or something completely different?
Command Interface) packet structure. It is not same as in mentioned link.
from userspace through the device node there?
I know I asked this before, but I can't remember the answer, sorry, so
please include that in the changelog information when you resubmit.
thanks,
greg k-h
Module's APIs and hence custom APIs are added for communication with the
UWBS,
userspace spi api that is needed here?
With this will get required throughput for UWBS use cases to avoid multipleBased on the speed of the SPI bus, this should not be an issue at all.
round trip between user and kernel mode.
If it is, please provide us real performance numbers showing the
problem, as there are ways of speeding that up.
thanks,
greg k-h