From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: christophe leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] spi: fsl-spi: Fix parameter ram offset setup for CPM1
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 19:15:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1412640953.13320.502.camel@snotra.buserror.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <542FE1C4.7000403@c-s.fr>
On Sat, 2014-10-04 at 14:02 +0200, christophe leroy wrote:
> Le 03/10/2014 22:29, Scott Wood a écrit :
> > On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 18:49 +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >> On CPM1, the SPI parameter RAM has a default location. In fsl_spi_cpm_get_pram()
> >> there was a confusion between the SPI_BASE register and the base of the SPI
> >> parameter RAM. Fortunatly, it was working properly with MPC866 and MPC885
> >> because they do set SPI_BASE, but on MPC860 and other old MPC8xx that doesn't
> >> set SPI_BASE, pram_ofs was not properly set. This patch fixes this confusion.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Changes from v1 to v2: none
> >>
> >> drivers/spi/spi-fsl-cpm.c | 9 ++++-----
> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-cpm.c b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-cpm.c
> >> index 54b0637..0f3a912 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-cpm.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-cpm.c
> >> @@ -262,15 +262,14 @@ static unsigned long fsl_spi_cpm_get_pram(struct mpc8xxx_spi *mspi)
> >> pram_ofs = cpm_muram_alloc(SPI_PRAM_SIZE, 64);
> >> out_be16(spi_base, pram_ofs);
> >> } else {
> >> - struct spi_pram __iomem *pram = spi_base;
> >> - u16 rpbase = in_be16(&pram->rpbase);
> >> + u16 rpbase = in_be16(spi_base);
> >>
> >> - /* Microcode relocation patch applied? */
> >> + /* Microcode relocation patch applied | rpbase set by default */
> >> if (rpbase) {
> >> pram_ofs = rpbase;
> >> } else {
> >> - pram_ofs = cpm_muram_alloc(SPI_PRAM_SIZE, 64);
> >> - out_be16(spi_base, pram_ofs);
> >> + pram_ofs = offsetof(cpm8xx_t, cp_dparam[PROFF_SPI]) -
> >> + offsetof(cpm8xx_t, cp_dpmem[0]);
> >> }
> >> }
> > Why is PROFF_SPI not coming from the device tree?
> That's where it starts to become tricky.
>
> PROFF_SPI is defined in cpm1.h which is included by the driver already.
Yes, but those values shouldn't be used. It's a leftover from the old
way of hardcoding things and describing the hardware with kconfig rather
than the device tree.
> It provides the default offset from the start of the parameter RAM.
> Previously I had the following in my device tree, and the last part of
> the source above (the one for rpbase == 0) could not work.
>
> spi: spi@a80 {
> cell-index = <0>;
> compatible = "fsl,spi", "fsl,cpm1-spi";
> reg = <0xa80 0x30 0x3d80 0x30>;
>
> First reg area was the area for SPI registers. Second area was the
> parameter RAM zone, which was just mapped to get access to the SPI_BASE
> pointer (rpbase)
>
> Now I have
>
> compatible = "fsl,spi", "fsl,cpm1-spi-reloc";
> reg = <0xa80 0x30 0x3dac 0x2>;
>
> First reg area is the area for SPI registers. Second area is the
> SPI_BASE, as for the CPM2.
>
> On recent 8xx (885 and 866 at least) it contains the offset (=0x1D80) of
> the parameter RAM. But on old ones (860, ...) it contains 0. Therefore
> we have to get the default index in another way.
> What I wanted was to keep something similar to what's done with CPM2.
>
> What should it look like if that offset had to be in the device tree ?
If the offset is not relocatable or discoverable, it should stay in the
device tree. If you have an old chip you wouldn't have
fsl,cpm1-spi-reloc and thus you'd still have "0x3d80 0x30" in reg.
> > Why don't I see any
> > cpm spi in any device tree nor any binding for it?
> There's one in mgcoge.dts:
>
> spi@11aa0 {
> cell-index = <0>;
> compatible = "fsl,spi", "fsl,cpm2-spi";
> reg = <0x11a80 0x40 0x89fc 0x2>;
I'm not sure why I missed that, but this patch is for cpm1-spi, not
cpm2-spi...
Even if you insist on keeping your board dts out-of-tree, there should
at least be a binding in-tree.
BTW, more specific compatibles should come first.
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-07 0:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-03 16:49 [PATCH v2 1/2] spi: fsl-spi: Fix parameter ram offset setup for CPM1 Christophe Leroy
2014-10-03 20:29 ` Scott Wood
2014-10-04 12:02 ` christophe leroy
2014-10-07 0:15 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2014-10-08 16:21 ` leroy christophe
2014-10-08 16:30 ` Scott Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1412640953.13320.502.camel@snotra.buserror.net \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox