[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210507153132.GC6383@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 16:31:32 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>
Cc: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] spi: spi-mem: reject partial cycle transfers in
8D-8D-8D mode
On Fri, May 07, 2021 at 07:26:33PM +0530, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> Patches 2 and 3 are a slightly different matter. They add an extra
> register write. But most controllers I've come across don't support
> 1-byte writes in 8D mode. It is likely that they are sending
> bogus/undefined values in the second byte and deasserting CS only after
> the cycle is done. So they should _in theory_ change undefined behaviour
> to defined behaviour.
> Still, they introduce an extra register write. I'm not sure how
> risk-tolerant you want to be for stable backports. I will leave the
> judgement to you or Tudor or Vignesh.
Ah, given that if nobody's seeing any issues I'd probably just hold off
there TBH.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists