linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/8] spi: dt-bindings: spi-peripheral-props: add spi-offloads property

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240523-divided-herbicide-11396549e05f@spud>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 15:31:52 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@...il.com>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
	Martin Sperl <kernel@...tin.sperl.org>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/8] spi: dt-bindings: spi-peripheral-props: add
 spi-offloads property

On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 02:15:35PM +0200, Nuno Sá wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-05-22 at 19:24 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 09:54:39AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 7:53 AM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 11:51:58AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 4:32 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:56:47PM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> > > > 
> > I think you're right something like that is a stretch to say that that
> > is a feature of the SPI controller - but I still don't believe that
> > modelling it as part of the ADC is correct. I don't fully understand the
> > io-backends and how they work yet, but the features you describe there
> > seem like something that should/could be modelled as one, with its own
> > node and compatible etc. Describing custom RTL stuff ain't always
> > strightforward, but the stuff from Analog is versioned and documented
> > etc so it shouldn't be quite that hard.
> > 
> 
> Putting this in io-backends is likely a stretch but one thing to add is that the
> peripheral is always (I think) kind of the consumer of the resources. Taking the
> trigger (PWM) as an example and even when it is directly connected with the offload
> block, the peripheral still needs to know about it. Think of sampling frequency...
> The period of the trigger signal is strictly connected with the sampling frequency of
> the peripheral for example. So I see 2 things:

Cherry picking this one thing to reply to cos I'm not sure if it was
understood as I intended. When I talked about io-backends I was not
suggesting that we drop the spi-offload idea, I was suggesting that if
something has a dedicated register region & resources that handles both
offloading and some usecase specific data processing that it should be a
device of its own, acting as a provider of both spi-offloads and
io-backends.
I'll look at the rest of the mail soonTM.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)