linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
  • * Re: [PATCH V8 1/7] spi: Add stacked and parallel memories support in SPI core
           [not found] ` <20230511073134.41180-2-amit.kumar-mahapatra@amd.com>
           [not found]   ` <b9edd6c8-87fa-fa6f-33e4-85809f0430cb@opensource.cirrus.com>
    @ 2023-05-30 16:25   ` Pratyush Yadav
      2023-06-08  9:29     ` Mahapatra, Amit Kumar
      1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
    From: Pratyush Yadav @ 2023-05-30 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
      To: Amit Kumar Mahapatra
      Cc: git, sbinding, linux-kernel, vigneshr, alexandre.belloni, richard,
    	amitrkcian2002, michael, linux-spi, tudor.ambarus, broonie,
    	linux-mtd, linux-arm-kernel, miquel.raynal, michal.simek,
    	claudiu.beznea, pratyush
    
    Hi Amit,
    
    I did not get a chance to look at all the old comments in the previous
    versions. So apologies in advance if I comment something that has
    already been mentioned before.
    
    On Thu, May 11 2023, Amit Kumar Mahapatra wrote:
    
    > For supporting multiple CS the SPI device need to be aware of all the CS
    > values. So, the "chip_select" member in the spi_device structure is now an
    > array that holds all the CS values.
    >
    > spi_device structure now has a "cs_index_mask" member. This acts as an
    > index to the chip_select array. If nth bit of spi->cs_index_mask is set
    > then the driver would assert spi->chip_select[n].
    >
    > In parallel mode all the chip selects are asserted/de-asserted
    > simultaneously and each byte of data is stored in both devices, the even
    > bits in one, the odd bits in the other. The split is automatically handled
    > by the GQSPI controller. The GQSPI controller supports a maximum of two
    > flashes connected in parallel mode. A SPI_CONTROLLER_MULTI_CS flag bit is
    > added in the spi controntroller flags, through ctlr->flags the spi core
    
    Typo: s/controntroller/controller/
    
    > will make sure that the controller is capable of handling multiple chip
    > selects at once.
    >
    > For supporting multiple CS via GPIO the cs_gpiod member of the spi_device
    > structure is now an array that holds the gpio descriptor for each
    > chipselect.
    
    General comment: For large changes, it is useful to describe a
    high-level overview of your new design so reviewers and future readers
    can get a mental model of what is going on. I did not see anything of
    that sort in this series.
    
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Amit Kumar Mahapatra <amit.kumar-mahapatra@amd.com>
    > ---
    > CS GPIO is not tested on our hardware but it has been tested by @Stefan
    > https://lore.kernel.org/all/3f148a0c-8885-0425-28f4-2a53937a388f@opensource.cirrus.com/
    > Stefan, could you please provide your Tested-by tag for this patch
    > ---
    >  drivers/spi/spi.c       | 231 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
    >  include/linux/spi/spi.h |  32 ++++--
    >  2 files changed, 189 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-)
    >
    > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
    >
    > index 9291b2a0e887..a793e56f6a21 100644
    > --- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
    > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
    > @@ -612,10 +612,24 @@ static int spi_dev_check(struct device *dev, void *data)
    >  {
    >  	struct spi_device *spi = to_spi_device(dev);
    >  	struct spi_device *new_spi = data;
    > +	int idx, nw_idx;
    >
    > -	if (spi->controller == new_spi->controller &&
    > -	    spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0) == spi_get_chipselect(new_spi, 0))
    > -		return -EBUSY;
    > +	if (spi->controller == new_spi->controller) {
    > +		for (idx = 0; idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; idx++) {
    > +			for (nw_idx = 0; nw_idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; nw_idx++) {
    > +				if ((idx != 0 && !spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx)) ||
    > +				    (nw_idx != 0 && !spi_get_chipselect(spi, nw_idx))) {
    
    Hmm, from what I can understand, spi->chipselect[i] gives the
    corresponding physical CS for logical CS i. So for example, if both old
    and new devices map logical CS 1 to physical CS 0, this would not detect
    the conflict.
    
    What exactly are you trying to do here?
    
    > +					continue;
    > +				} else if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx) ==
    > +				    spi_get_chipselect(new_spi, nw_idx)) {
    > +					dev_err(dev,
    > +						"chipselect %d already in use\n",
    > +						spi_get_chipselect(new_spi, nw_idx));
    > +					return -EBUSY;
    > +				}
    > +			}
    > +		}
    > +	}
    >  	return 0;
    >  }
    >
    > @@ -629,7 +643,7 @@ static int __spi_add_device(struct spi_device *spi)
    >  {
    >  	struct spi_controller *ctlr = spi->controller;
    >  	struct device *dev = ctlr->dev.parent;
    > -	int status;
    > +	int status, idx;
    >
    >  	/*
    >  	 * We need to make sure there's no other device with this
    > @@ -638,8 +652,6 @@ static int __spi_add_device(struct spi_device *spi)
    >  	 */
    >  	status = bus_for_each_dev(&spi_bus_type, NULL, spi, spi_dev_check);
    >  	if (status) {
    > -		dev_err(dev, "chipselect %d already in use\n",
    > -				spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0));
    
    Nitpick: No need for the braces around if anymore.
    
    >  		return status;
    >  	}
    >
    > @@ -649,8 +661,13 @@ static int __spi_add_device(struct spi_device *spi)
    >  		return -ENODEV;
    >  	}
    >
    > -	if (ctlr->cs_gpiods)
    > -		spi_set_csgpiod(spi, 0, ctlr->cs_gpiods[spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0)]);
    > +	if (ctlr->cs_gpiods) {
    > +		for (idx = 0; idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; idx++) {
    > +			if (!(idx != 0 && !spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx)))
    
    Again, I don't get why you do this. This would simply fail for any
    device that maps logical CS 1 to physical CS 0.
    
    > +				spi_set_csgpiod(spi, idx,
    > +						ctlr->cs_gpiods[spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx)]);
    > +		}
    > +	}
    >
    >  	/*
    >  	 * Drivers may modify this initial i/o setup, but will
    > @@ -690,13 +707,15 @@ int spi_add_device(struct spi_device *spi)
    >  {
    >  	struct spi_controller *ctlr = spi->controller;
    >  	struct device *dev = ctlr->dev.parent;
    > -	int status;
    > +	int status, idx;
    >
    > -	/* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
    > -	if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0) >= ctlr->num_chipselect) {
    > -		dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n", spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0),
    > -			ctlr->num_chipselect);
    > -		return -EINVAL;
    > +	for (idx = 0; idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; idx++) {
    > +		/* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
    > +		if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx) >= ctlr->num_chipselect) {
    > +			dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n", spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx),
    > +				ctlr->num_chipselect);
    > +			return -EINVAL;
    > +		}
    
    Since this function is doing a bunch of sanity checks, I think you
    should also make sure multiple logical CS don't map to the same physical
    CS. For example, make sure that spi->chip_select[0] !=
    spi->chip_select[1] and so on.
    
    >  	}
    >
    >  	/* Set the bus ID string */
    > @@ -713,12 +732,15 @@ static int spi_add_device_locked(struct spi_device *spi)
    >  {
    >  	struct spi_controller *ctlr = spi->controller;
    >  	struct device *dev = ctlr->dev.parent;
    > +	int idx;
    >
    > -	/* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
    > -	if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0) >= ctlr->num_chipselect) {
    > -		dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n", spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0),
    > -			ctlr->num_chipselect);
    > -		return -EINVAL;
    > +	for (idx = 0; idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; idx++) {
    > +		/* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
    > +		if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx) >= ctlr->num_chipselect) {
    > +			dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n", spi_get_chipselect(spi, idx),
    > +				ctlr->num_chipselect);
    > +			return -EINVAL;
    > +		}
    
    As adding a new device gets more complex, we should stop duplicating
    code between here and spi_add_device(). So you should either move this
    code to another function and call it from both places or add a new
    parameter called "locked" and merge spi_add_device() and
    spi_add_device_locked(). I do not have string preferences for either,
    but I do like the latter a bit more.
    
    >  	}
    >
    >  	/* Set the bus ID string */
    > @@ -966,58 +988,122 @@ static void spi_res_release(struct spi_controller *ctlr, struct spi_message *mes
    >  static void spi_set_cs(struct spi_device *spi, bool enable, bool force)
    >  {
    >  	bool activate = enable;
    > +	u32 cs_num = 0;
    > +	int idx;
    >
    >  	/*
    > -	 * Avoid calling into the driver (or doing delays) if the chip select
    > -	 * isn't actually changing from the last time this was called.
    > +	 * In parallel mode all the chip selects are asserted/de-asserted
    > +	 * at once
    >  	 */
    > -	if (!force && ((enable && spi->controller->last_cs == spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0)) ||
    > -		       (!enable && spi->controller->last_cs != spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0))) &&
    > -	    (spi->controller->last_cs_mode_high == (spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH)))
    > -		return;
    > -
    > -	trace_spi_set_cs(spi, activate);
    > +	if ((spi->cs_index_mask & SPI_PARALLEL_CS_MASK) == SPI_PARALLEL_CS_MASK) {
    
    This check only works if you support a maximum of 2 CS in parallel. If
    you support up to, say, 4 then a chip which sets only CS 0 and 2 would
    not fall under this check.
    
    I think your code in general should treat SPI_CS_CNT_MAX as an arbitrary
    value and should be able to handle changing it to any reasonable value.
    
    > +		spi->controller->last_cs_mode_high = spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH;
    > +
    > +		if ((spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0) || !spi->controller->set_cs_timing) && !activate)
    > +			spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_hold, NULL);
    > +
    > +		if (spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH)
    > +			enable = !enable;
    > +
    > +		if (spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0) && spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 1)) {
    > +			if (!(spi->mode & SPI_NO_CS)) {
    > +				/*
    > +				 * Historically ACPI has no means of the GPIO polarity and
    > +				 * thus the SPISerialBus() resource defines it on the per-chip
    > +				 * basis. In order to avoid a chain of negations, the GPIO
    > +				 * polarity is considered being Active High. Even for the cases
    > +				 * when _DSD() is involved (in the updated versions of ACPI)
    > +				 * the GPIO CS polarity must be defined Active High to avoid
    > +				 * ambiguity. That's why we use enable, that takes SPI_CS_HIGH
    > +				 * into account.
    > +				 */
    > +				if (has_acpi_companion(&spi->dev)) {
    > +					for (idx = 0; idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; idx++)
    > +						gpiod_set_value_cansleep(spi_get_csgpiod(spi, idx),
    > +									 !enable);
    > +				} else {
    > +					for (idx = 0; idx < SPI_CS_CNT_MAX; idx++)
    > +						/* Polarity handled by GPIO library */
    > +						gpiod_set_value_cansleep(spi_get_csgpiod(spi, idx),
    > +									 activate);
    > +				}
    > +			}
    > +			/* Some SPI masters need both GPIO CS & slave_select */
    > +			if ((spi->controller->flags & SPI_MASTER_GPIO_SS) &&
    > +			    spi->controller->set_cs)
    > +				spi->controller->set_cs(spi, !enable);
    > +		} else if (spi->controller->set_cs) {
    > +			spi->controller->set_cs(spi, !enable);
    > +		}
    >
    > -	spi->controller->last_cs = enable ? spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0) : -1;
    > -	spi->controller->last_cs_mode_high = spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH;
    > +		if (spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0) || spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 1) ||
    > +		    !spi->controller->set_cs_timing) {
    > +			if (activate)
    > +				spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_setup, NULL);
    > +			else
    > +				spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_inactive, NULL);
    > +		}
    > +	} else {
    >
    > -	if ((spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0) || !spi->controller->set_cs_timing) && !activate)
    > -		spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_hold, NULL);
    > +		if (spi->cs_index_mask)
    > +			cs_num = ffs(spi->cs_index_mask) - 1;
    >
    > -	if (spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH)
    > -		enable = !enable;
    > +		/*
    > +		 * Avoid calling into the driver (or doing delays) if the chip select
    > +		 * isn't actually changing from the last time this was called.
    > +		 */
    > +		if (!force && ((enable && spi->controller->last_cs ==
    > +				spi_get_chipselect(spi, cs_num)) ||
    > +				(!enable && spi->controller->last_cs !=
    > +				 spi_get_chipselect(spi, cs_num))) &&
    > +		    (spi->controller->last_cs_mode_high ==
    > +		     (spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH)))
    > +			return;
    > +
    > +		trace_spi_set_cs(spi, activate);
    > +
    > +		spi->controller->last_cs = enable ? spi_get_chipselect(spi, cs_num) : -1;
    > +		spi->controller->last_cs_mode_high = spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH;
    > +
    > +		if ((spi_get_csgpiod(spi, cs_num) || !spi->controller->set_cs_timing) && !activate)
    > +			spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_hold, NULL);
    > +
    > +		if (spi->mode & SPI_CS_HIGH)
    > +			enable = !enable;
    > +
    > +		if (spi_get_csgpiod(spi, cs_num)) {
    > +			if (!(spi->mode & SPI_NO_CS)) {
    > +				/*
    > +				 * Historically ACPI has no means of the GPIO polarity and
    > +				 * thus the SPISerialBus() resource defines it on the per-chip
    > +				 * basis. In order to avoid a chain of negations, the GPIO
    > +				 * polarity is considered being Active High. Even for the cases
    > +				 * when _DSD() is involved (in the updated versions of ACPI)
    > +				 * the GPIO CS polarity must be defined Active High to avoid
    > +				 * ambiguity. That's why we use enable, that takes SPI_CS_HIGH
    > +				 * into account.
    > +				 */
    > +				if (has_acpi_companion(&spi->dev))
    > +					gpiod_set_value_cansleep(spi_get_csgpiod(spi, cs_num),
    > +								 !enable);
    > +				else
    > +					/* Polarity handled by GPIO library */
    > +					gpiod_set_value_cansleep(spi_get_csgpiod(spi, cs_num),
    > +								 activate);
    > +			}
    > +			/* Some SPI masters need both GPIO CS & slave_select */
    > +			if ((spi->controller->flags & SPI_MASTER_GPIO_SS) &&
    > +			    spi->controller->set_cs)
    > +				spi->controller->set_cs(spi, !enable);
    > +		} else if (spi->controller->set_cs) {
    > +			spi->controller->set_cs(spi, !enable);
    > +		}
    >
    > -	if (spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0)) {
    > -		if (!(spi->mode & SPI_NO_CS)) {
    > -			/*
    > -			 * Historically ACPI has no means of the GPIO polarity and
    > -			 * thus the SPISerialBus() resource defines it on the per-chip
    > -			 * basis. In order to avoid a chain of negations, the GPIO
    > -			 * polarity is considered being Active High. Even for the cases
    > -			 * when _DSD() is involved (in the updated versions of ACPI)
    > -			 * the GPIO CS polarity must be defined Active High to avoid
    > -			 * ambiguity. That's why we use enable, that takes SPI_CS_HIGH
    > -			 * into account.
    > -			 */
    > -			if (has_acpi_companion(&spi->dev))
    > -				gpiod_set_value_cansleep(spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0), !enable);
    > +		if (spi_get_csgpiod(spi, cs_num) || !spi->controller->set_cs_timing) {
    > +			if (activate)
    > +				spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_setup, NULL);
    >  			else
    > -				/* Polarity handled by GPIO library */
    > -				gpiod_set_value_cansleep(spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0), activate);
    > +				spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_inactive, NULL);
    >  		}
    > -		/* Some SPI masters need both GPIO CS & slave_select */
    > -		if ((spi->controller->flags & SPI_MASTER_GPIO_SS) &&
    > -		    spi->controller->set_cs)
    > -			spi->controller->set_cs(spi, !enable);
    > -	} else if (spi->controller->set_cs) {
    > -		spi->controller->set_cs(spi, !enable);
    > -	}
    > -
    > -	if (spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0) || !spi->controller->set_cs_timing) {
    > -		if (activate)
    > -			spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_setup, NULL);
    > -		else
    > -			spi_delay_exec(&spi->cs_inactive, NULL);
    
    I did not read this blob of code in detail yet. A couple of general
    comments though. You seem to be special-casing the multi-CS path. I do
    not think that is a good idea in general. Can you refactor it in such a
    way that the same bit of code handles an arbitrary number of chip
    selects being asserted at the same time?
    
    >  	}
    >  }
    >
    > @@ -2246,8 +2332,8 @@ static void of_spi_parse_dt_cs_delay(struct device_node *nc,
    >  static int of_spi_parse_dt(struct spi_controller *ctlr, struct spi_device *spi,
    >  			   struct device_node *nc)
    >  {
    > -	u32 value;
    > -	int rc;
    > +	u32 value, cs[SPI_CS_CNT_MAX] = {0};
    > +	int rc, idx;
    >
    >  	/* Mode (clock phase/polarity/etc.) */
    >  	if (of_property_read_bool(nc, "spi-cpha"))
    > @@ -2320,13 +2406,21 @@ static int of_spi_parse_dt(struct spi_controller *ctlr, struct spi_device *spi,
    >  	}
    >
    >  	/* Device address */
    > -	rc = of_property_read_u32(nc, "reg", &value);
    > -	if (rc) {
    > +	rc = of_property_read_variable_u32_array(nc, "reg", &cs[0], 1,
    > +						 SPI_CS_CNT_MAX);
    > +	if (rc < 0 || rc > ctlr->num_chipselect) {
    >  		dev_err(&ctlr->dev, "%pOF has no valid 'reg' property (%d)\n",
    >  			nc, rc);
    
    This error message is not very helpful for the rc > ctlr->num_chipselect
    case. I think you should make them separate checks and error messages.
    
    >  		return rc;
    > +	} else if ((of_property_read_bool(nc, "parallel-memories")) &&
    
    Nitpick: Why make it an else-if chain? Independent if statements would
    be better since these are not directly related.
    
    > +		   (!(ctlr->flags & SPI_CONTROLLER_MULTI_CS))) {
    > +		dev_err(&ctlr->dev, "SPI controller doesn't support multi CS\n");
    > +		return -EINVAL;
    >  	}
    
    You should also make sure that no cs[idx] is greater than
    ctlr->num_chipselect. Perhaps also check for multple cs[idx] pointing to the
    same physical CS? It might be better to check that in spi_add_device()
    though. Not sure...
    
    > -	spi_set_chipselect(spi, 0, value);
    > +	for (idx = 0; idx < rc; idx++)
    > +		spi_set_chipselect(spi, idx, cs[idx]);
    > +	/* By default set the spi->cs_index_mask as 1 */
    
    Nitpick: We can infer this fact quite easily by reading the code. The
    comment should instead explain _why_ it is doing so.
    
    > +	spi->cs_index_mask = 0x01;
    >
    >  	/* Device speed */
    >  	if (!of_property_read_u32(nc, "spi-max-frequency", &value))
    > @@ -3905,7 +3999,8 @@ static int __spi_validate(struct spi_device *spi, struct spi_message *message)
    >  	 * cs_change is set for each transfer.
    >  	 */
    >  	if ((spi->mode & SPI_CS_WORD) && (!(ctlr->mode_bits & SPI_CS_WORD) ||
    > -					  spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0))) {
    > +					  spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 0) ||
    > +					  spi_get_csgpiod(spi, 1))) {
    
    Again, you hard-code this to only ever supporting 2 CS in parallel.
    Please make it generic.
    
    >  		size_t maxsize;
    >  		int ret;
    >
    > diff --git a/include/linux/spi/spi.h b/include/linux/spi/spi.h
    > index cfe42f8cd7a4..d0f9a9a8b6d8 100644
    > --- a/include/linux/spi/spi.h
    > +++ b/include/linux/spi/spi.h
    > @@ -19,6 +19,11 @@
    >  #include <linux/acpi.h>
    >  #include <linux/u64_stats_sync.h>
    >
    > +/* Max no. of CS supported per spi device */
    > +#define SPI_CS_CNT_MAX 2
    
    This is fine, but...
    
    > +
    > +/* chip select mask */
    > +#define SPI_PARALLEL_CS_MASK	(BIT(0) | BIT(1))
    
    ... as I mentioned above, the way you write this patch you makes it
    difficult to change the limit in the future. Please refactor it so that
    if you just change SPI_CS_CNT_MAX to any arbitrary value, the core is
    able to handle it.
    
    I also think calling it "parallel" can be a bit confusing. Perhaps use
    "Multi CS" everywhere?
    
    >  struct dma_chan;
    >  struct software_node;
    >  struct ptp_system_timestamp;
    > @@ -166,6 +171,7 @@ extern void spi_transfer_cs_change_delay_exec(struct spi_message *msg,
    >   *	deasserted. If @cs_change_delay is used from @spi_transfer, then the
    >   *	two delays will be added up.
    >   * @pcpu_statistics: statistics for the spi_device
    > + * @cs_index_mask: Bit mask of the active chipselect(s) in the chipselect array
    >   *
    >   * A @spi_device is used to interchange data between an SPI slave
    >   * (usually a discrete chip) and CPU memory.
    > @@ -181,7 +187,7 @@ struct spi_device {
    >  	struct spi_controller	*controller;
    >  	struct spi_controller	*master;	/* Compatibility layer */
    >  	u32			max_speed_hz;
    > -	u8			chip_select;
    > +	u8			chip_select[SPI_CS_CNT_MAX];
    
    Should also update documentation for chip_select.
    
    >  	u8			bits_per_word;
    >  	bool			rt;
    >  #define SPI_NO_TX		BIT(31)		/* No transmit wire */
    > @@ -212,7 +218,7 @@ struct spi_device {
    >  	void			*controller_data;
    >  	char			modalias[SPI_NAME_SIZE];
    >  	const char		*driver_override;
    > -	struct gpio_desc	*cs_gpiod;	/* Chip select gpio desc */
    > +	struct gpio_desc	*cs_gpiod[SPI_CS_CNT_MAX];	/* Chip select gpio desc */
    >  	struct spi_delay	word_delay; /* Inter-word delay */
    >  	/* CS delays */
    >  	struct spi_delay	cs_setup;
    > @@ -222,6 +228,13 @@ struct spi_device {
    >  	/* The statistics */
    >  	struct spi_statistics __percpu	*pcpu_statistics;
    >
    > +	/* Bit mask of the chipselect(s) that the driver need to use from
    > +	 * the chipselect array.When the controller is capable to handle
    > +	 * multiple chip selects & memories are connected in parallel
    > +	 * then more than one bit need to be set in cs_index_mask.
    > +	 */
    > +	u32			cs_index_mask : SPI_CS_CNT_MAX;
    > +
    >  	/*
    >  	 * likely need more hooks for more protocol options affecting how
    >  	 * the controller talks to each chip, like:
    > @@ -278,22 +291,22 @@ static inline void *spi_get_drvdata(const struct spi_device *spi)
    >
    >  static inline u8 spi_get_chipselect(const struct spi_device *spi, u8 idx)
    >  {
    > -	return spi->chip_select;
    > +	return spi->chip_select[idx];
    >  }
    >
    >  static inline void spi_set_chipselect(struct spi_device *spi, u8 idx, u8 chipselect)
    >  {
    > -	spi->chip_select = chipselect;
    > +	spi->chip_select[idx] = chipselect;
    >  }
    >
    >  static inline struct gpio_desc *spi_get_csgpiod(const struct spi_device *spi, u8 idx)
    >  {
    > -	return spi->cs_gpiod;
    > +	return spi->cs_gpiod[idx];
    >  }
    >
    >  static inline void spi_set_csgpiod(struct spi_device *spi, u8 idx, struct gpio_desc *csgpiod)
    >  {
    > -	spi->cs_gpiod = csgpiod;
    > +	spi->cs_gpiod[idx] = csgpiod;
    >  }
    >
    >  /**
    > @@ -398,6 +411,8 @@ extern struct spi_device *spi_new_ancillary_device(struct spi_device *spi, u8 ch
    >   * @bus_lock_spinlock: spinlock for SPI bus locking
    >   * @bus_lock_mutex: mutex for exclusion of multiple callers
    >   * @bus_lock_flag: indicates that the SPI bus is locked for exclusive use
    > + * @multi_cs_cap: indicates that the SPI Controller can assert/de-assert
    > + *	more than one chip select at once.
    >   * @setup: updates the device mode and clocking records used by a
    >   *	device's SPI controller; protocol code may call this.  This
    >   *	must fail if an unrecognized or unsupported mode is requested.
    > @@ -564,6 +579,11 @@ struct spi_controller {
    >  #define SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_TX		BIT(4)	/* Requires tx */
    >
    >  #define SPI_MASTER_GPIO_SS		BIT(5)	/* GPIO CS must select slave */
    > +	/*
    > +	 * The spi-controller has multi chip select capability and can
    > +	 * assert/de-assert more than one chip select at once.
    > +	 */
    > +#define SPI_CONTROLLER_MULTI_CS		BIT(6)
    >
    >  	/* Flag indicating if the allocation of this struct is devres-managed */
    >  	bool			devm_allocated;
    
    I only took a high level overview of this patch and I think it needs
    some reworking. I will take another look later when it gets in better
    shape. I am especially worried about interactions with SPI MEM (not sure
    if there need to be any, but still I should take a look) and ACPI
    support. But I think you have your work cut out for you for the next
    version :-)
    
    I also want to look at the SPI NOR parts, let's see if I can find some
    more time this week.
    
    --
    Regards,
    Pratyush Yadav
    
    _______________________________________________
    linux-arm-kernel mailing list
    linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
    http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
    
    ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

  • end of thread, other threads:[~2023-06-08  9:29 UTC | newest]
    
    Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
    -- links below jump to the message on this page --
         [not found] <20230511073134.41180-1-amit.kumar-mahapatra@amd.com>
         [not found] ` <20230511073134.41180-2-amit.kumar-mahapatra@amd.com>
         [not found]   ` <b9edd6c8-87fa-fa6f-33e4-85809f0430cb@opensource.cirrus.com>
    2023-05-16  5:47     ` [PATCH V8 1/7] spi: Add stacked and parallel memories support in SPI core Mahapatra, Amit Kumar
    2023-05-18 16:19       ` Stefan Binding
    2023-05-30 16:25   ` Pratyush Yadav
    2023-06-08  9:29     ` Mahapatra, Amit Kumar
    

    This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
    for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
    as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).