linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 05/11] spi: omap2-mcspi: enhance pinctrl support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 4 Jun 2013 09:53:04 +0000
From:	"Hebbar, Gururaja" <gururaja.hebbar@...com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	"khilman@...aro.org" <khilman@...aro.org>,
	"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	"davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com" 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Bedia, Vaibhav" <vaibhav.bedia@...com>,
	"Rajashekhara, Sudhakar" <sudhakar.raj@...com>,
	"spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 05/11] spi: omap2-mcspi: enhance pinctrl support

On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 00:57:26, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 03:43:05PM +0530, Hebbar Gururaja wrote:
> > Amend the spi omap controller to optionally take a pin control
> > handle and set the state of the pins to:
> > 
> > - "default" on boot, resume and before performing an spi transfer
> > - "idle" after initial default, after resume default, and after each
> > spi xfer
> > - "sleep" on suspend()
> 
> Looking at this code I can't really see what's OMAP-specific about it -
> exactly the same flow should apply to pretty much any SPI controller,
> especially given that the code will happily ignore missing states.
> We're just setting the idle state when not actively transferring data
> which seems sensible and generic.
> 
> This suggests to me that we should be adding this code into the core,
> probably joined up with the transfer_one_message stuff, so that any
> hardware which has an idle state will be able to get the benefit.  Can
> anyone think of a reason why we shouldn't do that?

Let me pull out some info about these and come back

> 


Regards, 
Gururaja
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/