From: Yun Zhou <yun.zhou@windriver.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-spi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Xue, Ying" <Ying.Xue@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: 回复: [PATCH] spi: disable chipselect after complete transfer
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 01:01:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19c69765-8584-2e6b-25b8-7053a5afa5d4@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YgU1+cIlANAkJCAL@sirena.org.uk>
Hi Brown,
>> If there are multiple messages, and each message only has one xfer,
>> and the cs_change of each xfer is 1, during the transmission of the
>> messages, the CS will keep active even until at the end. This must be
>> unreasonable.
> This is not something that most drivers are expected to use, cs_change
> should only be being used at all for very unusual hardware and it should
> be used even less frequently for the last transfer in a message. It is
> fragile and anyone using it really needs to know what they're doing but
> the feature is there.
Maybe it's not normal to set "cs_change" in the last xfer. However, in
most cases, SPI messages come from user space, and these messages may
come from multiple different applications. We can't make the whole
controller fail to work normally due to an inappropriate message of one
application.
>
>> I can't understand why it have to keep CS active after the
>> transmission is completed. Could you please explain this in detail?
> The feature predates me working on the SPI stack, the obvious examples
> would be a device that doesn't actually use chip select where you want
> to avoid all chip select changes or if you need to do some other actions
> in the middle of a SPI transaction for some reason (which would need a
> bunch of system level considerations to actually be safe/sensible like
> making sure you're not sharing the SPI bus).
At present, if "cs_change" is not set, CS will be changed back to inactive
after the transmission is completed. If "cs_change" is set, CS will not
be changed. This obviously violates the definition of "cs_change".
Therefore, I think my patch does not break the support of "cs_change",
but consolidates the support of "cs_change". It also ensures that the whole
SPI controller will not be abnormal due to a message from userspace.
Regards,
Yun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-10 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <SN6PR11MB3008AF5619B0B026836FD7429F2F9@SN6PR11MB3008.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2022-02-10 15:57 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-10 17:01 ` Yun Zhou [this message]
2022-02-10 17:14 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-14 12:35 ` Yun Zhou
2022-02-14 12:45 ` Mark Brown
[not found] ` <8fd9c3ef-df64-b8ad-de6e-ef86806d53b5@windriver.com>
2022-02-14 14:36 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-16 10:41 ` Yun Zhou
2022-02-16 16:23 ` 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=19c69765-8584-2e6b-25b8-7053a5afa5d4@windriver.com \
--to=yun.zhou@windriver.com \
--cc=Ying.Xue@windriver.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®