[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9917eca6-1543-44f0-b0c3-388a85b80e93@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 18:01:07 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Praveen Talari <praveen.talari@....qualcomm.com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@....qualcomm.com,
dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com, prasad.sodagudi@....qualcomm.com,
mukesh.savaliya@....qualcomm.com, quic_vtanuku@...cinc.com,
aniket.randive@....qualcomm.com, chandana.chiluveru@....qualcomm.com,
jyothi.seerapu@....qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] spi: geni-qcom: Add target abort support
On 2/4/26 5:57 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 05:41:46PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 2/4/26 5:28 PM, Praveen Talari wrote:
>
>>> + if (spi->target)
>>> + spi->target_abort = spi_geni_target_abort;
>
>> The same check is made in core:
>
>> spi_target_abort()
>> -> spi_controller_is_target()
>
>> So I'm assuming the intention was to allow assigning the func pointer
>> indiscriminately. Other drivers seem to do it both ways.
>
>> Mark, any specific preference?
>
> Not really TBH, it's redundant in the driver but if the people working
> on the driver find having the check there saves them having to check
> that the core does the right thing that's fine. It's not like this is a
> fast path.
Thanks
Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists