[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <VE1PR04MB6638D0C9FE0289FFE13ABA49899C0@VE1PR04MB6638.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:53:29 +0000
From: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com"
<matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/2] spi: introduce fallback to pio
On 2020/06/15 22:36 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 02:18:54PM +0000, Robin Gong wrote:
> > Seems not easy to find a suitable error value, how about EBADR which
> > sounds like no any available dma_async_tx_descriptor got by calling
> dmaengine_prep_slave_sg?
>
> > #define EBADR 53 /* Invalid request descriptor */
>
> We could also pass in a flag that could be set separately to the error code to
> indicate that nothing had happened to the hardware yet.
Do you mean spi-imx.c checking 'ctlr->flags' before return such error code?
Or just like below done in spi.c.
+fallback_pio:
ret = ctlr->transfer_one(ctlr, msg->spi, xfer);
if (ret < 0) {
+ if (ret == - EBADR && ctlr->cur_msg_mapped &&
+ (ctlr->flags & SPI_CONTROLLER_FALLBACK)) {
+ __spi_unmap_msg(ctlr, msg);
+ ctlr->fallback = true;
+ goto fallback_pio;
+ }
+
Powered by blists - more mailing lists