[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5c1a5edd-adfd-44f2-a993-bc3f43222a3a@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:35:12 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
Cc: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com>,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
Vladimir Kondratiev <vladimir.kondratiev@...ileye.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Tawfik Bayouk <tawfik.bayouk@...ileye.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-mem: add statistics support to ->exec_op() calls
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 04:43:55PM +0530, Dhruva Gole wrote:
> On Feb 09, 2024 at 14:51:23 +0100, Théo Lebrun wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * We do not have the concept of messages or transfers. Let's consider
> > + * that one operation is equivalent to one message and one transfer.
> Why 1 message _and_ 1 xfer and not simply 1 xfer?
> Even in the example of testing that you showed above the values for
> message and xfer are anyway going to be same, then why have these 2
> members in the first place? Can we not do away with one of these?
If the device supports regular SPI operations as well as spi-mem
operations then this will ensure that the spi-mem stats fit in with the
other operations. If it only supports spi-mem operations it would not
matter so much.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists