From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Balbi Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/2] driver: spi: Add quad spi read support Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:59:58 +0300 Message-ID: <20130729095958.GI23710@radagast> References: <1375082550-30544-1-git-send-email-sourav.poddar@ti.com> <1375082550-30544-3-git-send-email-sourav.poddar@ti.com> <20130729093258.GF23710@radagast> <51F6392B.8030809@ti.com> Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fDERRRNgB4on1jOB" Return-path: Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:49927 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752331Ab3G2KAW (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:00:22 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51F6392B.8030809@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Sourav Poddar Cc: balbi@ti.com, broonie@kernel.org, spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net, grant.likely@linaro.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, rnayak@ti.com --fDERRRNgB4on1jOB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 03:13:07PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote: > On Monday 29 July 2013 03:02 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:52:30PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote: > >>Since, qspi controller uses quad read. > >> > >>Configuring the command register, if the transfer of data needs > >>dual or quad lines. > >> > >>This patch has been done on top of the following patch[1], which is jus= t the > >>basic idea of adding dual/quad support in spi framework. > >>$subject patch will undergo changes with the ongoing discussion in the > >>community. > >> > >>This patch is posted to demonstrate how patch 1 of the series will supp= ort > >>quad read. > >> > >>[1]: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.spi.devel/14047 > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar > >>--- > >> drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > >> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >>diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c > >>index 51fe95f..8a32b1c 100644 > >>--- a/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c > >>+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c > >>@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ struct ti_qspi { > >> #define QSPI_3_PIN (1<< 18) > >> #define QSPI_RD_SNGL (1<< 16) > >> #define QSPI_WR_SNGL (2<< 16) > >>+#define QSPI_RD_DUAL (3<< 16) > >> #define QSPI_RD_QUAD (7<< 16) > >so RD_QUAD is defined in previous patch but not RD_DUAL ? What gives ? > > > I think I will define RD_DUAL in the previous patch... > >IMHO, just merge this patch with previous and make the entire driver > >depend on the other patch. > > > but I was thinking of keeping rest of the $subject patch seperate, since = the > idea of implementing dual/quad read in spi framework is still under > discussion. > and this patch will change. >=20 > So, it would be good if we can get the basic previous patch in, and > then when the > other discussion is sorted out, we can get this in? alright, in that case it makes sense. --=20 balbi --fDERRRNgB4on1jOB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR9j0dAAoJEIaOsuA1yqREznMQAJz4eE7HEKPkFZYxYn1ruqTD L7gan9TKe9gBnTYBVhMZks0OpTklQfVAHZZWXdU5bj1SVy7hHeCJw/yXIOXn7vqg ivdYk3H1aEIi+QlYoxYw0z1XojTU1wOz/J6gX7RPnd9luRrVK/AKeIlFAvBBbpDl UdsFGP3bA7EdGs8cSh6tQP8uqPuXiO1FKnOQmXDC7G9Vi2ofYrzBUEhWQTSg9/Za zkUPCUic/vxIqWo80QpLDq6GKVRQ/B7hrO0SehEr4MLmSaZq9RPmrlF7+aOQ7PFJ 0vsEuNddNAy50S3UjxQso4Ias6pCtk8BA6bJhotuFnEZQvjymDXF6DVWvmgyvXWE ps/HqJD907OZjqL+cX7dBNMErVQbGveumckBxJNlkEBfpGwZ2mhPt9JRjPsBraUu NkKAUu3rrF2Lllp0EewPm08s0onsXHAZIyYtcezNuGl6hrx1gKri9KOFBR5V8amH O3dQ80yAmBrOc2ZkduEfgTxU8snHK0MfkkMyprESO9cyUHhnOd7qDDAMg8uVCzib 8vp9XdAq8d2ctwA7r5eZDTCWSh0A1UUv3dts0nfSZL5At88FApqUQGjaXYvxPt/x qDEqYJPdM4CwNifed4eXR7pNm9kRKoBwzYXiFJ5B43zeKNRlQB1nacBJ8MmoKM0f Sf3WsVSmAdVAlWXGuzkc =mr1V -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fDERRRNgB4on1jOB--