Re: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: m25p80: consider max_transfer_size when reading

[Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 07:34:26PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 11:28:03AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 06:40:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 12:22:37AM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> 
> > > > I'd like to come back to this discussion. You said best would be to fix
> > > > the chip driver. To do this and calculate an appropriate value for
> > > > max_transfer_size the chip driver would have to know that the spi_device
> > > > is a spi-nor device.
> 
> > > That doesn't make any sense, the controller hardware doesn't magically
> > > change based on what is connected to it.
> 
> > I believe Heiner has an (unstated here, but stated elsewhere?)
> > assumption that his driver has a maximum *message* size, not *transfer*
> > size. So he's explaining how to work around that by implicitly figuring
> > out what the message size would be based on a transfer size, I think.
> 
> That still wouldn't explain how this could depend on the connected
> device, the message size isn't going to change any more than the
> transfer size is.

Ah, well I bet Heiner's mostly just testing flash (m25p80) and/or m25p80
is one of the bigger stressors.

Anyway, you're definitely correct that Heiner's suggested approach is
not good. He's essentially implying his driver should be intuiting the
message size / transfer size patterns for arbitrary users. I suppose we
really just need to figure out what his actual problem is, so we can
address it generically.

Brian