[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dd41f014-79e8-4567-9617-754b93e2c12d@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 16:16:50 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Larisa Grigore <larisa.grigore@....com>,
Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Target mode improvements
On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 05:53:12PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> I suppose one could try using FIFO mode for transfers which request
> timestamping and DMA for transfers which don't. I don't have an insight
> into what impact that will have on the driver, but I suspect at the very
> least one will have to transform "DSPI_DMA_MODE" into "dspi->dma_available"
> and "dspi->dma_in_use", and reconfigure the SPI_RSER register (interrupt
> routing, to DMA engine or to CPUs) at every transfer rather than at dspi_init().
> The question is whether you would be willing to see and maintain such
> complexity increase, when AFAIK, the LS1028A FIFO mode passes its
> requirements.
Switching between modes is incredibly common, usually between PIO (for
very short transfers) and DMA, that's no problem. Factoring in
timestamping seems like a reasonable signal I guess, might trip someone
who was trying to benchmark things up but probably not normal users.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists