From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: sja1105: adapt to a SPI controller with a limited max transfer size
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 17:06:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210520140609.mriocqfabkcflsls@skbuf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210520135615.GB3962@sirena.org.uk>
Hi Mark,
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 02:56:15PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 04:50:31PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> > Only that certain SPI controllers, such as the spi-sc18is602 I2C-to-SPI
> > bridge, cannot keep the chip select asserted for that long.
> > The spi_max_transfer_size() and spi_max_message_size() functions are how
> > the controller can impose its hardware limitations upon the SPI
> > peripheral driver.
>
> You should respect both, frankly I don't see any advantage to using
> cs_change for something like this - just do a bunch of async SPI
> transfers and you'll get the same effect in terms of being able to keep
> the queue for the controller primed with more robust support since it's
> not stressing edge cases. cs_change is more for doing things that are
> just very non-standard.
Sorry, I don't really understand your comment: in which way would it be
more robust for my use case to use spi_async()?
The cs_change logic was already there prior to this patch, I am just
reiterating how it works. Given the way in which it works (which I think
is correct), the most natural way to limit the buffer length is to look
for the max transfer len.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-20 14:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-20 13:50 [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: sja1105: adapt to a SPI controller with a limited max transfer size Vladimir Oltean
2021-05-20 13:56 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-20 14:06 ` Vladimir Oltean [this message]
2021-05-20 14:29 ` Mark Brown
2021-05-20 14:54 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-05-20 16:54 ` Mark Brown
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=20210520140609.mriocqfabkcflsls@skbuf \
--to=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vivien.didelot@gmail.com \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp.com \
/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