Hello Sekhar,
On 01/06/2010, at 12:18, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
[...]
> Considering this, can you please accept the change Wolfgang
> is asking for for so this useful patch can move forward?
Yes, I am fine applying the changes Wolfgang requested.
I have been busy working on other stuff, hence the dela
Hi Delio,
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 17:11:56, Delio Brignoli wrote:
> Hello Wolfgang,
>
> On 21/05/2010, at 15:13, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >> + *rxp = buf_reg_val & 0xFF;
> >> + rxp++;
> >> + }
> >
> > Please change into:
> >
> >
Hello Wolfgang,
On 24/05/2010, at 22:48, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <15866eae-624b-4850-b10f-78ab99e3a...@audioscience.com> you wrote:
>>
>> On 21/05/2010, at 15:13, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
+ *rxp = buf_reg_val & 0xFF;
+ rxp++;
Dear Delio Brignoli,
In message <15866eae-624b-4850-b10f-78ab99e3a...@audioscience.com> you wrote:
>
> On 21/05/2010, at 15:13, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >> + *rxp = buf_reg_val & 0xFF;
> >> + rxp++;
> >> + }
> >
> > Please ch
Hello Wolfgang,
On 21/05/2010, at 15:13, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> +*rxp = buf_reg_val & 0xFF;
>> +rxp++;
>> +}
>
> Please change into:
>
> if (rxp)
> *rxp++ = buf_
Dear Delio Brignoli,
In message <25096244-c685-4d68-bbf9-6df2f154a...@audioscience.com> you wrote:
> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register from 2 to
> 1 and
> take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module.
...
> + /* if data is available */
> +
Hello Sekhar,
I resubmitted the patch a few days ago (13th of May) with the changes you
requested. Please ack it, so it can be applied.
Thanks
--
Delio
On 18/05/2010, at 14:25, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 18:27:51, Delio Brignoli wrote:
>> Reduce the number of reads per byte t
Hello Sekhar,
On 18/05/2010, at 14:25, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> The patch looks good to me.
>
> Can you please publish some sort of numbers in the
> patch description indicating the performance improvement
> achieved?
will do.
> A minor nit below:
[...]
>> + if((o_cnt == (len -
Hi Delio,
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 18:27:51, Delio Brignoli wrote:
> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register from 2 to
> 1 and
> take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module.
The patch looks good to me.
Can you please publish some sort of numbers in the
patch de
Hi Sandeep,
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 23:01:31, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Hello Paulraj,
> >
> > On 13/05/2010, at 17:10, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
> > >> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register
> > from 2
> > >> to 1 and
> > >> take advantage of the TX buffer in
>
> Hello Paulraj,
>
> On 13/05/2010, at 17:10, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
> >> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register
> from 2
> >> to 1 and
> >> take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module.
> >
> > May I ask which chip device this was tested on.
>
> Sure, it w
Hello Paulraj,
On 13/05/2010, at 17:10, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
>> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register from 2
>> to 1 and
>> take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module.
>
> May I ask which chip device this was tested on.
Sure, it was tested on a LogicPD Zoo
>
> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register from 2
> to 1 and
> take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module.
May I ask which chip device this was tested on.
>
> Signed-off-by: Delio Brignoli
> ---
> drivers/spi/davinci_spi.c | 67 +++--
Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register from 2 to 1
and
take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module.
Signed-off-by: Delio Brignoli
---
drivers/spi/davinci_spi.c | 67 +++-
1 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 32 deletions
14 matches
Mail list logo
