From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] SPI and spi_cs_activate
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:27:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201001291127.02072.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100129161810.GV23389@leila.ping.de>
On Friday 29 January 2010 11:18:10 Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:11:36AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 29 January 2010 10:59:28 Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
> > > I am trying to get the spi_mmc driver by Robert Selberg and Hans Eklund
> > > to run on my new Coldfire board. (The driver was posted as a patch some
> > > time ago, clearly marked as not ready for mainline. I just did not
> > > figure out the correct search term to give the message ID.)
> > >
> > > Now I am running into problems because the driver uses
> > > spi_cs_[de]activate, which is rather useless on coldfire which does
> > > automatic cs.
> > >
> > > Looking through other drivers' code it seems to me that
> > > spi_cs_[de]activate was never meant to be called from anybody else but
> > > some special SPI drivers that can not aotumatically control cs lines or
> > > for systems where SPI is done in software and so setting the
> > > appropriate GPIOs is handed over to special board-dependent code.
> >
> > there are plenty of SPI controllers which allow the CS to be manually
> > controlled. this isnt a "special" driver.
>
> OK, of course controlling CS manually is possible on most systems (via
> GPIO). What I meant is that most systems do not care to control it
> automatically (mostly for complexity reasons or because of real
> HW limitations, as far as I understand).
i'm not talking about GPIOs. i'm talking about dedicated CS pins that are
connected to the controller.
> > the MMC/SPI driver was written on a Blackfin system. it working on any
> > other system is coincidental as a result of leveraging the common
> > frameworks. feel free to submit fixes.
>
> This is my intention in case I understand in which direction I have
> to fix. (And in case I then get it to work in such a way, of course.)
see how the linux mmc/spi driver does it. i dont think linux provides a
dedicate cs function for SPI drivers to use, but the linux mmc/spi doesnt seem
to have a problem.
> Are all SPI drivers supposed to supply functions to manually control
> the CS lines?
*shrug*
> If so, what means shall be provided to disable automatic control?
i dont understand the question. implement the two functions that are part of
the SPI API.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20100129/850c0515/attachment.pgp
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-29 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-29 15:59 [U-Boot] SPI and spi_cs_activate Wolfgang Wegner
2010-01-29 16:11 ` Mike Frysinger
2010-01-29 16:18 ` Wolfgang Wegner
2010-01-29 16:27 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
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=201001291127.02072.vapier@gentoo.org \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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