On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:57:44 +0100, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Behavior of CS signal in combination of spi-cs-high and gpio descriptors
> is not clearly defined and documented. So clarify the documentation
Applied to
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next
T
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 8:18 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Yeah, it'd definitely be easier to read and clearer what people should
> actually do.
I think it would be beneficial if this consisted of two very clearly
separated parts:
1. the actual recommended binding - so people writing new
devicetrees
On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 12:36:40PM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:57 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller
> wrote:
> > + device node | cs-gpio | CS pin state active | Note
> > + +===+=+=
> > + spi-cs-high
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 11:01 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Behavior of CS signal in combination of spi-cs-high and gpio descriptors
> is not clearly defined and documented. So clarify the documentation
>
> Cc: linus.wall...@linaro.org
> Cc: linux-g...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikola
> Am 09.12.2020 um 22:28 schrieb Sven Van Asbroeck :
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 3:08 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller
> wrote:
>>
>> But I have tested with
>>
>>> spi->mode |= SPI_MODE_3;
>>
>> which should keep the mode intact. Right? That did not work either.
>>
>
> - make sure ("spi: fix client
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 3:08 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>
> But I have tested with
>
> > spi->mode |= SPI_MODE_3;
>
> which should keep the mode intact. Right? That did not work either.
>
- make sure ("spi: fix client driver breakages when using GPIO descriptors")
is in your tree
- your pane
Hi Andreas,
> Am 09.12.2020 um 21:01 schrieb Andreas Kemnade :
>
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:04:26 -0500
> Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:16 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is also what made me wonder if that is really intended because then
>>> the whole di
On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:04:26 -0500
Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:16 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller
> wrote:
> >
> > This is also what made me wonder if that is really intended because then
> > the whole discussion about the cs-gpio-flags and inversion and the fixes
> > would not h
> Am 09.12.2020 um 20:04 schrieb Sven Van Asbroeck :
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:16 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller
> wrote:
>>
>> This is also what made me wonder if that is really intended because then
>> the whole discussion about the cs-gpio-flags and inversion and the fixes
>> would not have be
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:16 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>
> This is also what made me wonder if that is really intended because then
> the whole discussion about the cs-gpio-flags and inversion and the fixes
> would not have been needed. The current code and fixes are all about
> not ignoring t
> Am 09.12.2020 um 18:36 schrieb Sven Van Asbroeck :
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:57 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller
> wrote:
>>
>> +
>> + device node | cs-gpio | CS pin state active | Note
>> + +===+=+=
>> + spi-cs-high
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:57 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>
> +
> + device node | cs-gpio | CS pin state active | Note
> + +===+=+=
> + spi-cs-high | - | H |
> + - | -
Behavior of CS signal in combination of spi-cs-high and gpio descriptors
is not clearly defined and documented. So clarify the documentation
Cc: linus.wall...@linaro.org
Cc: linux-g...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller
---
.../bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml | 27
13 matches
Mail list logo
