[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871pluc5id.fsf@bootlin.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 18:10:50 +0100
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Pratyush Yadav
<pratyush@...nel.org>, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Steam Lin <STLin2@...bond.com>, Santhosh Kumar K <s-k6@...com>,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/28] spi: spi-mem: Create a repeated address operation
Hi Tudor,
First, thank you very much for all this precious feedback! I am happy to
get feedback not only on the spi-mem side, but also on the NAND changes!
On 05/11/2025 at 16:43:58 +01, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 10/31/25 6:26 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>> In octal DTR mode, while the command opcode is *always* repeated,
>
> this info is wrong: opcode can be repeated, inverted or a dedicated 16bit,
> so please fix this to not mislead readers
I didn't know :) But yeah I had SPI NAND mind which was obviously
wrong. I'll correct.
>> addresses may either be long enough to cover at least two bytes (in
>> which case the existing macro works), or otherwise for single byte
>> addresses, the byte must also be duplicated and sent twice: on each
>> front of the clock. Create a macro for this common case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h | 8 ++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h b/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h
>> index 81c9c7e793b6ab894675e0198d412d84b8525c2e..e4db0924898ce5b17d2b6d4269495bb968db2871 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/spi/spi-mem.h
>> @@ -43,6 +43,14 @@
>> .dtr = true, \
>> }
>>
>> +#define SPI_MEM_DTR_OP_RPT_ADDR(__val, __buswidth) \
>
> I find the name too generic. This is an macro for 1 byte addresses,
> right?
Yes it is. The name mimics the "dtr command repeat" macro name. Maybe
you want to include the info that it is carrying a single byte? maybe
"*RPT_SINGLE_BYTE_ADDR"? but that's a big too long IMO. Any other idea?
Thanks,
Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists