Re: [PATCH v6 04/19] spi: spi-mem: allow specifying a command's extension
From: Pratyush Yadav <hidden>
Date: 2020-05-22 18:23:34
Also in:
linux-mediatek, linux-spi, lkml
Hi Boris, On 21/05/20 08:22PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Wed, 20 May 2020 22:00:38 +0530 Pratyush Yadav [off-list ref] wrote: As mentioned in one of my previous review, you should patch the mxic driver before extending the opcode field: --->8---diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-mxic.c b/drivers/spi/spi-mxic.c index 69491f3a515d..c3f4136a7c1d 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/spi-mxic.c +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-mxic.c@@ -356,6 +356,7 @@ static int mxic_spi_mem_exec_op(struct spi_mem *mem, int nio = 1, i, ret; u32 ss_ctrl; u8 addr[8]; + u8 cmd[2];
Regarding your comment about bisect-ability, how about I change this to: u8 cmd[sizeof(op->cmd.opcode)]; and put this patch before the change to 2-byte opcodes. This should also make it resistent to further changes in opcode size. Does that sound like a sane idea?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
ret = mxic_spi_set_freq(mxic, mem->spi->max_speed_hz); if (ret)@@ -393,7 +394,10 @@ static int mxic_spi_mem_exec_op(struct spi_mem *mem, writel(readl(mxic->regs + HC_CFG) | HC_CFG_MAN_CS_ASSERT, mxic->regs + HC_CFG); - ret = mxic_spi_data_xfer(mxic, &op->cmd.opcode, NULL, 1); + for (i = 0; i < op->cmd.nbytes; i++) + cmd[i] = op->cmd.opcode >> (8 * (op->cmd.nbytes - i - 1)); + + ret = mxic_spi_data_xfer(mxic, cmd, NULL, op->cmd.nbytes); if (ret) goto out;
-- Regards, Pratyush Yadav Texas Instruments India _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel