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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 10:17:12 +0800 From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org> To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> Cc: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...inj.com>, "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "orsonzhai@...il.com" <orsonzhai@...il.com>, "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "zhang.lyra@...il.com" <zhang.lyra@...il.com>, "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>, "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, "lanqing.liu@...eadtrum.com" <lanqing.liu@...eadtrum.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: spi: Add Spreadtrum SPI controller documentation Hi Rob, On 15 August 2018 at 04:27, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 11:03:11AM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote: >> Hi Trent, >> >> On 9 August 2018 at 02:57, Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...inj.com> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2018-08-08 at 11:54 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 06:35:28PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote: >> >> > On 8 August 2018 at 17:50, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote: >> >> > > Right, I don't think we added this yet (if we did I can't see >> >> > > it). I'd >> >> > > add a new field to spi_transfer for this, then other controllers >> >> > > with >> >> > > the same support can implement it as well and drivers can start >> >> > > using >> >> > > it too. >> >> > OK. So I will name the new filed as 'word_delay', is it OK for you? >> >> >> >> Sounds good, yes. >> > >> > Should it be in µs like the existing iter-transfer delay? I think >> > perhaps units of cycles of the SPI clock make more sense? >> >> Since some SPI controllers just want some interval values (neither µs >> unit nor cycles unit ) set into hardware, and the hardware will >> convert to the correct delay time automatically. So I did not force >> 'word_delay' unit as µs or cycle, and just let the slave devices >> decide the unit which depends on the SPI hardware requirement. > > This needs to be defined units in DT, not decided by each controller. Do you mean we should introduce one standard property (maybe named as 'word_delay_unit') to define the word_delay unit? If we really need to specify the unit of word_delay, I think we can add comments for spi_tansfer to specify the unit, which will be better. diff --git a/include/linux/spi/spi.h b/include/linux/spi/spi.h index a64235e..7a72c0a 100644 --- a/include/linux/spi/spi.h +++ b/include/linux/spi/spi.h @@ -711,6 +711,8 @@ extern void spi_res_release(struct spi_controller *ctlr, * @delay_usecs: microseconds to delay after this transfer before * (optionally) changing the chipselect status, then starting * the next transfer or completing this @spi_message. + * @word_delay: clock cycles to inter word delay after each word size (set by bits_per_word) + * transmission. * @transfer_list: transfers are sequenced through @spi_message.transfers * @tx_sg: Scatterlist for transmit, currently not for client use * @rx_sg: Scatterlist for receive, currently not for client use @@ -793,6 +795,7 @@ struct spi_transfer { u8 bits_per_word; u16 delay_usecs; u32 speed_hz; + u16 word_delay; struct list_head transfer_list; }; -- Baolin Wang Best Regards
Powered by blists - more mailing lists