Re: [PATCH 1/3] spi: spi-mem: add automatic poll status functions
From: Pratyush Yadav <hidden>
Date: 2021-04-26 16:26:33
Also in:
linux-spi, lkml
Hi, On 26/04/21 04:39PM, patrice.chotard@foss.st.com wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Christophe Kerello <redacted> With STM32 QSPI, it is possible to poll the status register of the device. This could be done to offload the CPU during an operation (erase or program a SPI NAND for example). spi_mem_poll_status API has been added to handle this feature. Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <redacted> Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@foss.st.com> --- drivers/spi/spi-mem.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c b/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c index 1513553e4080..43dce4b0efa4 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c@@ -743,6 +743,40 @@ static inline struct spi_mem_driver *to_spi_mem_drv(struct device_driver *drv) return container_of(drv, struct spi_mem_driver, spidrv.driver); } +/** + * spi_mem_poll_status() - Poll memory device status + * @mem: SPI memory device + * @op: the memory operation to execute + * @mask: status bitmask to ckeck + * @match: status expected value
Technically, (status & mask) expected value. Dunno if that is obvious enough to not spell out explicitly.
+ * @timeout: timeout
+ *
+ * This function send a polling status request to the controller driver
+ *
+ * Return: 0 in case of success, -ETIMEDOUT in case of error,
+ * -EOPNOTSUPP if not supported.
+ */
+int spi_mem_poll_status(struct spi_mem *mem,
+ const struct spi_mem_op *op,
+ u8 mask, u8 match, u16 timeout)
+{
+ struct spi_controller *ctlr = mem->spi->controller;
+ int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
+ if (ctlr->mem_ops && ctlr->mem_ops->poll_status) {You should call spi_mem_supports_op() before sending any ops to the controller. Invalid/unsupported ops can cause unexpected behavior.
+ ret = spi_mem_access_start(mem); + if (ret) + return ret; + + ret = ctlr->mem_ops->poll_status(mem, op, mask, match, timeout);
I wonder if it is better to let spi-mem core take care of the timeout part. On one hand it reduces code duplication on the driver side a little bit. Plus it makes sure drivers don't mess anything up with bad (or no) handling of the timeout. But on the other hand the interface becomes a bit awkward since you'd have to pass a struct completion around, and it isn't something particularly hard to get right either. What do you think?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ + spi_mem_access_end(mem); + } + + return ret; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(spi_mem_poll_status); + static int spi_mem_probe(struct spi_device *spi) { struct spi_mem_driver *memdrv = to_spi_mem_drv(spi->dev.driver);diff --git a/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h b/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h index 2b65c9edc34e..5f78917c0f68 100644 --- a/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h +++ b/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h@@ -250,6 +250,7 @@ static inline void *spi_mem_get_drvdata(struct spi_mem *mem) * the currently mapped area), and the caller of * spi_mem_dirmap_write() is responsible for calling it again in * this case. + * @poll_status: poll memory device status * * This interface should be implemented by SPI controllers providing an * high-level interface to execute SPI memory operation, which is usually the@@ -274,6 +275,9 @@ struct spi_controller_mem_ops { u64 offs, size_t len, void *buf); ssize_t (*dirmap_write)(struct spi_mem_dirmap_desc *desc, u64 offs, size_t len, const void *buf); + int (*poll_status)(struct spi_mem *mem, + const struct spi_mem_op *op, + u8 mask, u8 match, u16 timeout); }; /**@@ -369,6 +373,10 @@ devm_spi_mem_dirmap_create(struct device *dev, struct spi_mem *mem, void devm_spi_mem_dirmap_destroy(struct device *dev, struct spi_mem_dirmap_desc *desc); +int spi_mem_poll_status(struct spi_mem *mem, + const struct spi_mem_op *op, + u8 mask, u8 match, u16 timeout); + int spi_mem_driver_register_with_owner(struct spi_mem_driver *drv, struct module *owner);
-- Regards, Pratyush Yadav Texas Instruments Inc. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel