On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> Also I have some questions on this approach. Is this driver for SSP ip or SPI
> ip, looks like latter. In both the cases there are some existing drivers in
> kernel and adding one more IMHO doesnt make sense. What we really need a
> common core
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 01:47:40PM +0800, chao bi wrote:
> Dear Linus,
> Thanks for your kind comments. Seems you were viewing the 1st version, I've
> submitted 2nd version and to deliver the 3rd version soon, will include you
> for review.
Was the third version posted?
Also I have some questions
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:47 AM, chao bi wrote:
> Thanks for your kind comments. Seems you were viewing the 1st version, I've
> submitted 2nd version and to deliver the 3rd version soon, will include you
> for review.
OK I'll look over it as it comes along...
>> > + WARN(i > 0, "%d words
Dear Linus,
Thanks for your kind comments. Seems you were viewing the 1st version, I've
submitted 2nd version and to deliver the 3rd version soon, will include you
for review.
Please see my comments inline below.
On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 12:23 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:16 AM, chao bi wrote:
> This patch is to implement SSP SPI controller driver, which has been applied
> and
> validated on intel Moorestown & Medfield platform. The patch are originated by
> Ken Mills and Sylvain Centelles
> ,
> and to be further developed by Channing
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:58 AM, chao bi wrote:
> 1. I understand the workqueue in spi core is for driving message
> transfer, so SPI driver should not create new workqueue for this usage.
> However, the workqueue created here is not for this usage it's to call
> back to SPI protocol driver (ifx6
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 21:32 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:09:34 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-12-11 at 16:46 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:58:31 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 12:38 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > > >
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:09:34 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-12-11 at 16:46 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:58:31 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 12:38 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:16:43 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> > >
> > >
On Tue, 2012-12-11 at 16:36 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:00:16 +0800, chao bi
> wrote:
> > > > > +static void dump_trailer(const struct device *dev, char *buf, int
> > > > > len, int sz)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + int tlen1 = (len < sz ? len : sz);
> > > > > + int
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:58:31 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 12:38 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:16:43 +0800, chao bi wrote:
>
> > > + master->mode_bits = SPI_CPOL | SPI_CPHA;
> > > + master->bus_num = SSP_CFG_GET_SPI_BUS_NB(ssp_cfg);
> > > + master->num_chi
On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:00:16 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> > > +static void dump_trailer(const struct device *dev, char *buf, int len,
> > > int sz)
> > > +{
> > > + int tlen1 = (len < sz ? len : sz);
> > > + int tlen2 = ((len - sz) > sz) ? sz : (len - sz);
> > > + unsigned char *p;
> > > + static cha
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 14:19 +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > +late_initcall(intel_mid_ssp_spi_init);
> >
> > Why late_initcall()? module_init() should be sufficient. Or better yet
> > replace the init and exit functions with module_pci_driver()
>
> Thats a legacy of the old SPI code not handling bus
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 12:38 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:16:43 +0800, chao bi wrote:
> > + master->mode_bits = SPI_CPOL | SPI_CPHA;
> > + master->bus_num = SSP_CFG_GET_SPI_BUS_NB(ssp_cfg);
> > + master->num_chipselect = 1;
> > + master->cleanup = cleanup;
> > + ma
Hi Grant,
Thanks for your comments, please see my answer below..
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 12:38 +, Grant Likely wrote:
> > include/linux/spi/spi-intel-mid-ssp.h | 326
>
> Most (if not all) of this header file looks like it needs to be moved
> into the .c file. Any symbol that is only
> I think I've asked this question before, but I can't remember if I've
> gotten an answer. How is this different from the designware spi
> controller that is already in the tree for medfield and moorestown MID
> platforms? (drivers/spi/spi-dw-mid.c).
Different devices.
> ... Okay, so I just wen
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:16:43 +0800, chao bi wrote:
>
> This patch is to implement SSP SPI controller driver, which has been applied
> and
> validated on intel Moorestown & Medfield platform. The patch are originated by
> Ken Mills and Sylvain Centelles
> ,
> and to be further developed by Chan
> Thats what I was trying to understand.
>
> If I am not wrong the latency is time related.
> Why only some platforms / modes need it also the value is not speed
> dependent.
Because the problem was fixed in the later devices.
> Also the spi core today doesnt have slave mode support thats a
> di
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Bi, Chao
mailto:chao...@intel.com>> wrote:
if (chip_info->enable_loopback)
+ chip->cr1 |= SSCR1_LBM;
Who sets the enable_loopback?
[Chao] 'enable_loopback' could be configured by SPI Protocol driver before it
setup SPI control
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:44:21 +0530
> Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:46 AM, chao bi wrote:
> >
> > > + /* Create the PM_QOS request */
> > > + if (drv_context->quirks & QUIRKS_USE_PM_QOS)
> > > +
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Bi, Chao wrote:
> if (chip_info->enable_loopback)
> + chip->cr1 |= SSCR1_LBM;
>
> Who sets the enable_loopback?
>
> ** **
>
> [Chao] ‘enable_loopback’ could be configured by SPI Protocol driver before
> it setup SPI cont
ject: Re: [PATCH] SPI: SSP SPI Controller driver
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:46 AM, chao bi
mailto:chao...@intel.com>> wrote:
This patch is to implement SSP SPI controller driver, which has been applied and
validated on intel Moorestown & Medfield platform. The patch are originat
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:44:21 +0530
Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:46 AM, chao bi wrote:
>
> > + /* Create the PM_QOS request */
> > + if (drv_context->quirks & QUIRKS_USE_PM_QOS)
> > + pm_qos_add_request(&drv_context->pm_qos_req,
> > +
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:46 AM, chao bi wrote:
> + /* Create the PM_QOS request */
> + if (drv_context->quirks & QUIRKS_USE_PM_QOS)
> + pm_qos_add_request(&drv_context->pm_qos_req,
> + PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY,
> + PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
>
Wha
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:46 AM, chao bi wrote:
>
> This patch is to implement SSP SPI controller driver, which has been
> applied and
> validated on intel Moorestown & Medfield platform. The patch are
> originated by
> Ken Mills and Sylvain Centelles <
> sylvain.centel...@intel.com>,
> and to b
This patch is to implement SSP SPI controller driver, which has been applied and
validated on intel Moorestown & Medfield platform. The patch are originated by
Ken Mills and Sylvain Centelles
,
and to be further developed by Channing and Chen Jun
according to their integration & validation on
This patch is to implement SSP SPI controller driver, which has been applied and
validated on intel Moorestown & Medfield platform. The patch are originated by
Ken Mills and Sylvain Centelles
,
and to be further developed by Channing and Chen Jun
according to their integration & validation on
26 matches
Mail list logo
