[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VcHU+Rh2ROjMcK+Yuyu1Ty9C0Dcx2SjrnrM4BV9NuMZig@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 10:47:04 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Colin Foster <colin.foster@...advantage.com>
Cc: linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, katie.morris@...advantage.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 mfd 9/9] mfd: ocelot: add support for the vsc7512 chip
via spi
On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 4:17 AM Colin Foster
<colin.foster@...advantage.com> wrote:
...
> > I'm wondering if you can use in both cases
> > spi_message_init_with_transfers().
>
> > > +static int ocelot_spi_regmap_bus_read(void *context, const void *reg, size_t reg_size,
> > > + void *val, size_t val_size)
> > > +{
> > > + struct spi_transfer tx, padding, rx;
>
> struct spi_transfer xfers[3] = {0};
> struct spi_transfer *xfer_tok = xfers;
unsigned int index;
> > > + struct device *dev = context;
> > > + struct ocelot_ddata *ddata;
> > > + struct spi_device *spi;
> > > + struct spi_message msg;
> > > +
> > > + ddata = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > > + spi = to_spi_device(dev);
> > > +
> > > + spi_message_init(&msg);
> > > +
> > > + memset(&tx, 0, sizeof(tx));
> > > +
> > > + tx.tx_buf = reg;
> > > + tx.len = reg_size;
index = 0;
> xfer_tok->tx_buf = reg;
> xfer_tok->len = reg_size;
tok[index] = ...;
index++;
> xfer_tok++;
>
> > > + spi_message_add_tail(&tx, &msg);
> > > +
> > > + if (ddata->spi_padding_bytes) {
> > > + memset(&padding, 0, sizeof(padding));
> > > +
> > > + padding.len = ddata->spi_padding_bytes;
> > > + padding.tx_buf = ddata->dummy_buf;
> > > + padding.dummy_data = 1;
>
> xfer_tok->len
> xfer_tok->tx_buf
> xfer_tok->dummy_data
tok[index] = ...
> xfer_tok++;
index++;
> > > + spi_message_add_tail(&padding, &msg);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + memset(&rx, 0, sizeof(rx));
> > > + rx.rx_buf = val;
> > > + rx.len = val_size;
>
> xfer_tok->rx_buf
> xfer_tok->len
tok[index] = ...
> xfer_tok++;
index++;
> > > + spi_message_add_tail(&rx, &msg);
>
> spi_message_init_with_transfers(&msg, xfers, xfer_tok - xfers);
..., index);
> > I'm wondering if you can use in both cases
> > spi_message_init_with_transfers().
>
> I could see that implementation getting the response of "what the heck
> were you thinking" or "that looks alright" and I honestly have no idea
> which pool it will fall into.
See above. I.o.w. use index based assignments.
> > > + return spi_sync(spi, &msg);
> > > +}
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists