From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eugen.Hristev at microchip.com Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 14:27:07 +0000 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/linux-tools: introduce spi linux tools In-Reply-To: <20200513195840.GZ12536@scaer> References: <20200513150324.330435-1-eugen.hristev@microchip.com> <87tv0j6etz.fsf@tarshish> <87r1vn6840.fsf@tarshish> <20200513195840.GZ12536@scaer> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 13.05.2020 22:58, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > On 2020-05-13 20:46 +0300, Baruch Siach spake thusly: >> Hi Eugen, >> >> On Wed, May 13 2020, Eugen.Hristev at microchip.com wrote: >>> On 13.05.2020 18:21, Baruch Siach wrote: >>>> On Wed, May 13 2020, Eugen Hristev wrote: >>>>> Add new linux tools package : spi. This is present in the Linux Kernel since >>>>> 4.5. >>>>> It now includes spidev_test and spidev_fdx tools. >>>> We have a package for spidev_test already. Consider adding spidev_fdx to >>>> that package instead. >>> While I understand your point, you should also consider that all linux >>> tools have a specific way to build in buildroot, and this I think should >>> be consistent. >> Agreed. >>> And spi tools would be not just spidev_test and might include future >>> applications, which may or may not have their place in the same spot as >>> spidev_test . >> In that case I think you should remove the spidev_test package. > > Yes, I like it that we can drop spidev_test. > > But do it multi-step: > > - intropduce spidev as a linux-tool > - drop the standalone spidev_test > > Do not forget to add legacy handling for it, though; see Config.in.legacy. Hi Yann and Baruch, Coming back to this, I noticed that the spidev_test package in buildroot is different than the spidev_test from kernel tools. From spidev_test package: Usage: spidev_test [-DsbdlHOLC3] -D --device device to use (default /dev/spidev1.1) -s --speed max speed (Hz) -d --delay delay (usec) -b --bpw bits per word -i --input input data from a file (e.g. "test.bin") -o --output output data to a file (e.g. "results.bin") -l --loop loopback -H --cpha clock phase -O --cpol clock polarity -L --lsb least significant bit first -C --cs-high chip select active high -3 --3wire SI/SO signals shared -v --verbose Verbose (show tx buffer) -p Send data (e.g. "1234\xde\xad") -N --no-cs no chip select -R --ready slave pulls low to pause -2 --dual dual transfer -4 --quad quad transfer # From kernel tools: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.7/source/tools/spi/spidev_test.c#L198 Looks it's a different program, or I am missing something ? In that case, I would think we cannot supersede the existing spidev_test package with the kernel tools. I would think both should be in the distribution, but how to differentiate them ? Thanks, Eugen > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > > -- > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | > | +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' >