Daniel Ribeiro wrote:
> Hi!
>
> You were right, there is nothing wrong with the spi transfer.
>
> The problem is the hardware. This chip really needs some delay before
> deasserting CS on register writes. Otherwise it just silently ignores
> the register write.
>
> I no longer think that anythin
Hi!
You were right, there is nothing wrong with the spi transfer.
The problem is the hardware. This chip really needs some delay before
deasserting CS on register writes. Otherwise it just silently ignores
the register write.
I no longer think that anything is wrong with spi communication, i can
Daniel Ribeiro wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Ned Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So far this looks good, but what have you declared about the chip in the
>> chip_info structure? In particular, what timeout and FIFO thresholds?
>> What processor are you using, and which port on
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Ned Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So far this looks good, but what have you declared about the chip in the
> chip_info structure? In particular, what timeout and FIFO thresholds?
> What processor are you using, and which port on that processor; there is
>
Daniel Ribeiro wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Ned Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Can you be more specific about your problem? If CS is not being
>> asserted/deasserted at the right times, then that needs to be fixed.
>> What are you using for CS; this driver only works correctl
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Ned Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you be more specific about your problem? If CS is not being
> asserted/deasserted at the right times, then that needs to be fixed.
> What are you using for CS; this driver only works correctly when a GPIO
> pin is assi
Daniel Ribeiro wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am converting a driver from ssp.c API to pxa2xx_spi. But
> when using PIO mode i am getting bogus rx data.
>
> I did some tests, and it looks like CS is being deasserted
> before the IO is done.
>
> The following patch solved the issue for me.
Can you be more s
Vernon Sauder wrote:
> Ned Forrester wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that implementing defaults is a good idea. I prefer the
>> current scheme of forcing the user to make a considered choice. In
>> particular, 0 is a valid value for the timeout and thresholds (it means
>> none in the case of timeout an
