[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 22:09:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc: linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sascha Weisenberger <sascha.weisenberger@...mens.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] iio: adc: Add support for TI ADC108S102 and
ADC128S102
On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 19:55 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 05/05/17 07:31, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * SPI message buffers:
> > + * tx_buf: |C0|C1|C2|C3|C4|C5|C6|C7|XX|
> > + * rx_buf: |XX|R0|R1|R2|R3|R4|R5|R6|R7|tt|tt|tt|tt|
> > + *
> > + * tx_buf: 8 channel read commands, plus 1 dummy command
> > + * rx_buf: 1 dummy response, 8 channel responses, plus 64-
> > bit timestamp
> > + */
> > + __be16 rx_buf[13]
> > ____cacheline_aligned;
> > + __be16 tx_buf[9]
> > ____cacheline_aligned;
>
> I would have thought the SPI dma wouldn't take itself out so you
> should be
> good with just the one cacheline_aligned? Maybe I'm missing
> something.
It was my idea for sake of consistency. Just to explicitly show that
buffers a cache aligned.
If you insist to remove one, it's your call at the end ;-)
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists