Dear Fabio Estevam,
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Thomas Petazzoni
>
> wrote:
> > It sounds really strange to manipulate WAIT_FOR_CMD and WAIT_FOR_IRQ
> > bits to adjust the chip select, and when reading the driver, it seemed
> > suspicious to me. After going through the datasheet, indeed t
Dear Fabio Estevam,
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Thomas Petazzoni
>
> wrote:
> > It sounds really strange to manipulate WAIT_FOR_CMD and WAIT_FOR_IRQ
> > bits to adjust the chip select, and when reading the driver, it seemed
> > suspicious to me. After going through the datasheet, indeed t
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Thomas Petazzoni
wrote:
>
> It sounds really strange to manipulate WAIT_FOR_CMD and WAIT_FOR_IRQ
> bits to adjust the chip select, and when reading the driver, it seemed
> suspicious to me. After going through the datasheet, indeed those bits
> are the appropriate
Marek,
Le Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:40:48 +0200,
Marek Vasut a écrit :
> +static uint32_t mxs_spi_cs_to_reg(unsigned cs)
> +{
> + uint32_t select = 0;
> +
> + if (cs & 1)
> + select |= BM_SSP_CTRL0_WAIT_FOR_CMD;
> + if (cs & 2)
> + select |= BM_SSP_CTRL0_WAIT_FOR_IR
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:58:38PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Hm, this is spread across mxs. Shawn, is there any plan for PM implementation
> for MXS ?
>
Near term, no. Long term, yes.
--
Regards,
Shawn
--
Live Secu
Dear Mark Brown,
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:58:38PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > It'd be nice to only keep the clocks enabled while doing transfers but
> > > again totally non-essential.
> >
> > Hm, this is spread across mxs. Shawn, is there any plan for PM
> > implementation for MXS ?
>
>
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:58:38PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > It'd be nice to only keep the clocks enabled while doing transfers but
> > again totally non-essential.
> Hm, this is spread across mxs. Shawn, is there any plan for PM implementation
> for MXS ?
Take a look at s3c64xx - I did som
Dear Mark Brown,
Thanks for the review!
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:40:48PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > This is slightly reworked version of the SPI driver.
> > Support for DT has been added and it's been converted
> > to queued API.
>
> Looks reasonable overall.
>
> > + bits_per_word = de
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:40:48PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> This is slightly reworked version of the SPI driver.
> Support for DT has been added and it's been converted
> to queued API.
Looks reasonable overall.
> + bits_per_word = dev->bits_per_word;
> + if (t && t->bits_per_word)
>
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 03:50:12PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:56:50PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Guess we are in violent agreement. The sequence would then either be
> > master = spi_alloc_device();
>
> The discussion is around spi_alloc_master rather than spi_al
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 09:38:07AM +0200, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
> Shawn Guo writes:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:45:19AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > I must be missing something. Why do almost all spi drivers call it in
> > > > the
> > > > error path, even if there is no call to spi_master
Shawn Guo writes:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:45:19AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > I must be missing something. Why do almost all spi drivers call it in the
> > > error path, even if there is no call to spi_master_get ?
> >
> > To push the refcounting to 0, to deallocate the device, I'd say .
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:56:50PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Guess we are in violent agreement. The sequence would then either be
> master = spi_alloc_device();
The discussion is around spi_alloc_master rather than spi_alloc_device,
isn't it?
Regards,
Shawn
> ...
> spi_mast
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 03:40:53PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:45:19AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > I must be missing something. Why do almost all spi drivers call it in the
> > > error path, even if there is no call to spi_master_get ?
> >
> > To push the refcounting
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:45:19AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > I must be missing something. Why do almost all spi drivers call it in the
> > error path, even if there is no call to spi_master_get ?
>
> To push the refcounting to 0, to deallocate the device, I'd say ...
>
It's not going to work
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:45:19AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Guenter Roeck,
>
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:10:37AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > Dear Shawn Guo,
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +08
Dear Guenter Roeck,
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:10:37AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Shawn Guo,
> >
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Gu
Dear Guenter Roeck,
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:16:15AM +0530, Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 07:00:54AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > >> Dear Shawn Guo,
> > >>
> > >> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:35:59PM -0700,
Dear Guenter Roeck,
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 02:28:40PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > Anyo
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:10:37AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Shawn Guo,
>
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > Anyo
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:16:15AM +0530, Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 07:00:54AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> Dear Shawn Guo,
> >>
> >> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:35:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> > > I th
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 02:28:40PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > Anyone up for writing some patches
Dear Shawn Guo,
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > Anyone up for writing some patches ? If not, I'll do it.
> > >
> > > Go ahea
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:42:28PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > Anyone up for writing some patches ? If not, I'll do it.
> > >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> Ok, will do. It i
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 07:00:54AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Dear Shawn Guo,
>>
>> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:35:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> > > I think the call to spi_master_put() triggers the call to
>> > > spi_master_release(
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:58:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Anyone up for writing some patches ? If not, I'll do it.
> >
> Go ahead.
>
Ok, will do. It isn't that simple, actually, since at least some of the drivers
also call spi_
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:29:47PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Anyone up for writing some patches ? If not, I'll do it.
>
Go ahead.
Regards,
Shawn
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover al
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 07:00:54AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Shawn Guo,
>
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:35:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > I think the call to spi_master_put() triggers the call to
> > > spi_master_release(). If so, kfree() would not be needed at all, and the
> > > d
Dear Shawn Guo,
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:35:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > I think the call to spi_master_put() triggers the call to
> > spi_master_release(). If so, kfree() would not be needed at all, and the
> > documentation is wrong.
>
> Also those drivers calling kfree in probe.
L
Dear Shawn Guo,
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:31:04AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > Couple of reasons for asking: No other SPI master driver calls it in
> > > the remove function (unless I missed it), most drivers don't call it
> > > in the probe function error path, and if I call it in the remov
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:35:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> I think the call to spi_master_put() triggers the call to
> spi_master_release().
> If so, kfree() would not be needed at all, and the documentation is wrong.
>
Also those drivers calling kfree in probe.
Regards,
Shawn
--
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:53:36AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:31:04AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > Couple of reasons for asking: No other SPI master driver calls it in the
> > > remove function (unless I missed it), most drivers don't call it in the
> > > probe function
Hi Marek,
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:31:04AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Guenter Roeck,
>
> [...]
>
> > > +static int __devexit mxs_spi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct spi_master *host;
> > > + struct mxs_spi *spi;
> > > + struct mxs_ssp *ssp;
> > > +
> > > + ho
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:31:04AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Couple of reasons for asking: No other SPI master driver calls it in the
> > remove function (unless I missed it), most drivers don't call it in the
> > probe function error path, and if I call it in the remove function in a
> > SPI m
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 01:53:00PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > + spi_master_put(host);
> > + kfree(host);
> > +
>
> Is the kfree() here and in the probe function really necessary ?
>
The following is how the kerneldoc of spi_alloc_master says.
* The caller is responsible for assigning
Dear Guenter Roeck,
[...]
> > +static int __devexit mxs_spi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct spi_master *host;
> > + struct mxs_spi *spi;
> > + struct mxs_ssp *ssp;
> > +
> > + host = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > + spi = spi_master_get_devdata(host);
> > + s
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 06:17:25AM -, Marek Vasut wrote:
> This is slightly reworked version of the SPI driver.
> Support for DT has been added and it's been converted
> to queued API.
>
> Based on previous attempt by:
> Fabio Estevam
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
> Signed-off-by: Marek
This is slightly reworked version of the SPI driver.
Support for DT has been added and it's been converted
to queued API.
Based on previous attempt by:
Fabio Estevam
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
Cc: Attila Kinali
Cc: Chris Ball
CC: Dong Aisheng
Cc: Grant Likely
C
This is slightly reworked version of the SPI driver.
Support for DT has been added and it's been converted
to queued API.
Based on previous attempt by:
Fabio Estevam
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
Cc: Chris Ball
Cc: Detlev Zundel
CC: Dong Aisheng
Cc: Grant Likely
C
39 matches
Mail list logo
