[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140318110640.GI11706@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 11:06:40 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@...inx.com>
Cc: Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"pawel.moll@....com" <pawel.moll@....com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
"galak@...eaurora.org" <galak@...eaurora.org>,
"rob@...dley.net" <rob@...dley.net>,
"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SPI: Add driver for Cadence SPI controller
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 05:22:37AM +0000, Harini Katakam wrote:
> > > > This needs to call spi_master_suspend() as well (and similarly on
> > > > resume).
...
> In case of a suspend, we are stopping an ongoing transfer and
> disabling the interface. In case I add clock disable and anything
> else to unprepared too, it will be a cleaner exit but it will still
> stop the transfer right? What do you suggest? Should we wait for
> transfer to complete or a timeout to occur?
I suggest doing what I said above and calling spi_master_suspend().
Right now what the driver is doing is just halting the hardware if a
transfer is in progress which will break any ongoing transfers.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists