Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2018-02-05

[PATCH v2 1/2] mtd: fsl-quadspi: Update slave device hwcap based on mode provided in dtsi file

From: Cyrille Pitchen <hidden>
Date: 2018-02-05 20:48:53
Also in: linux-devicetree

Hi Yogesh,

Le 02/02/2018 ? 06:31, Yogesh Gaur a ?crit?:
quoted hunk
FSL QuadSPI controller supports Single, dual, quad modes of operation.
Mode information is available via "spi-tx-bus-width" and
"spi-rx-bus-width" nodes of device tree for the connected slave device.

Update read and write hwcap capability for slave device by reading
"spi-rx-bus-width" and "spi-tx-bus-width" respectively.
Assign hwcaps mask to minimal caps for the slave node i.e.
	SNOR_HWCAPS_READ | SNOR_HWCAPS_PP

If value not provided in device tree file, then fallback to default
mode i.e. SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_1_4 and SNOR_HWCAPS_PP.

Signed-off-by: Prabhakar Kushwaha <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Yogesh Gaur <redacted>
---
Changes for v2:
- None

 drivers/mtd/spi-nor/fsl-quadspi.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/fsl-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/fsl-quadspi.c
index b9c5918..1503e0c 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/fsl-quadspi.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/fsl-quadspi.c
@@ -994,17 +994,14 @@ static void fsl_qspi_unprep(struct spi_nor *nor, enum spi_nor_ops ops)
 
 static int fsl_qspi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 {
-	const struct spi_nor_hwcaps hwcaps = {
-		.mask = SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_1_4 |
-			SNOR_HWCAPS_PP,
-	};
+	struct spi_nor_hwcaps hwcaps;
 	struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
 	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
 	struct fsl_qspi *q;
 	struct resource *res;
 	struct spi_nor *nor;
 	struct mtd_info *mtd;
-	int ret, i = 0;
+	int ret, i = 0, value;
 
 	q = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*q), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!q)
@@ -1077,6 +1074,10 @@ static int fsl_qspi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	/* iterate the subnodes. */
 	for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, np) {
+		/* Reset hwcaps mask to minimal caps for the slave node. */
+		hwcaps.mask = SNOR_HWCAPS_READ | SNOR_HWCAPS_PP;
+		value = 0;
+
 		/* skip the holes */
 		if (!q->has_second_chip)
 			i *= 2;
@@ -1106,6 +1107,51 @@ static int fsl_qspi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		/* set the chip address for READID */
 		fsl_qspi_set_base_addr(q, nor);
 
+		/*
+		 * If spi-rx-bus-width and spi-tx-bus-width not defined assign
+		 * default hardware capabilities SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_1_4 and
+		 * SNOR_HWCAPS_PP supported by the Quad-SPI controller.
+		 */
+		if (!of_property_read_u32(np, "spi-rx-bus-width", &value)) {
+			switch (value) {
+			case 1:
+				hwcaps.mask |= SNOR_HWCAPS_READ |
+					       SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_FAST;
+				break;
+			case 2:
+				hwcaps.mask |= SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_1_2 |
+					       SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_2_2;
I guess there is a misunderstanding in the meaning of spi-rx-bus-width and
spi-tx-bus_width.

spi-rx-bus-width = <N>, resp. spi-tx-bus-width = <N>, means the SPI controller
can receive, resp. send, data on N I/O Lines.

Then let's take the example of some Fast Read X-Y-Z command:

the op code is *sent* on X I/O lines: you need to check spi-tx-bus-width
the address/mode/dummy bits are *sent* on Y I/O lines: check spi-tx-bus-width too
the data bits are *received* on Z I/O lines: check spi-rx-bus_width.
+				break;
+			case 4:
+				hwcaps.mask |= SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_1_4 |
+					       SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_4_4;
The same here: to allow SPI 1-4-4, you have to check that spi-tx-bus-width == 4.

So your usage of spi-{tx|rx}-bus-width is not consistent with the usage done in
the SPI subsystem. Please have a look at drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c, especially
how the SPI_RX_QUAD and SPI_TX_QUAD flags are used in the m25p_probe() function
to have a better idea of how it should work.

Also have a look at of_spi_parse_dt() in drivers/spi/spi.c, to figure out how the
SPI_{TX|RX}_{DUAL|QUAD} flags are set according to the spi-{tx|rx}-bus-width DT
properties.
+				break;
+			default:
+				dev_err(dev,
+					"spi-rx-bus-width %d not supported\n",
+					value);
+				break;
+			}
+		} else
+			hwcaps.mask |= SNOR_HWCAPS_READ_1_1_4;
Not sure whether it passes checkpatch, you may have to add { } for the else
statement even if there is a single line as the if statement use { }.

Personally I don't mind that much. Please just check that your patch passes
checkpatch verification and it will be okay for me :)

Best regards,

Cyrille
+
+		if (!of_property_read_u32(np, "spi-tx-bus-width", &value)) {
+			switch (value) {
+			case 1:
+				hwcaps.mask |= SNOR_HWCAPS_PP;
+				break;
+			case 4:
+				hwcaps.mask |= SNOR_HWCAPS_PP_1_1_4 |
+					       SNOR_HWCAPS_PP_1_4_4;
+				break;
+			default:
+				dev_err(dev,
+					"spi-tx-bus-width %d not supported\n",
+					value);
+				break;
+			}
+		}
+
 		ret = spi_nor_scan(nor, NULL, &hwcaps);
 		if (ret)
 			goto mutex_failed;
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help