From: Eddie James <eajames@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>,
Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: Add FSI-attached SPI controller driver
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 13:28:40 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <90973143-bd0a-33cf-9eb8-a83be1a9b415@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VfOM5Rd3LRBtvyT96G=+J4KxTRoSVUcQTj+RxrGyZMMnQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/5/20 9:51 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 6:06 PM Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On 2/4/20 5:02 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:33 PM Eddie James <eajames@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/30/20 10:37 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:09 PM Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...
>
>>>>>> + struct device *dev;
>>>>> Isn't fsl->dev the same?
>>>>> Perhaps kernel doc to explain the difference?
>>>> No, it's not the same, as dev here is the SPI controller. I'll add a
>>>> comment.
>>> Why to have duplication then?
>>
>> Nothing is being duplicated, the two variables are storing entirely
>> different information, both of which are necessary for each SPI
>> controller that this driver is driving.
> Oh, I see now, thanks!
>
> ...
>
>>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < num_bytes; ++i)
>>>>>> + rx[i] = (u8)((in >> (8 * ((num_bytes - 1) - i))) & 0xffULL);
>>>>> Redundant & 0xffULL part.
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't it NIH of get_unalinged_be64 / le64 or something similar?
>>>> No, these are shift in/out operations. The read register will also have
>>>> previous operations data in them and must be extracted with only the
>>>> correct number of bytes.
>>> Why not to call put_unaligned() how the tail in this case (it's 0 or
>>> can be easily made to be 0) will affect the result?
>>
>> The shift-in is not the same as any byte-swap or unaligned operation.
>> For however many bytes we've read, we start at that many bytes
>> left-shifted in the register and copy out to our buffer, moving right
>> for each next byte... I don't think there is an existing function for
>> this operation.
> For me it looks like
>
> u8 tmp[8];
>
> put_unaligned_be64(in, tmp);
> memcpy(rx, tmp, num_bytes);
>
> put_unaligned*() is just a method to unroll the value to the u8 buffer.
> See, for example, linux/unaligned/be_byteshift.h implementation.
Unforunately it is not the same. put_unaligned_be64 will take the
highest 8 bits (0xff00000000000000) and move it into tmp[0]. Then
0x00ff000000000000 into tmp[1], etc. This is only correct for this
driver IF my transfer is 8 bytes. If, for example, I transfer 5 bytes,
then I need 0x000000ff00000000 into tmp[0], 0x00000000ff000000 into
tmp[1], etc. So I think my current implementation is correct.
Thanks,
Eddie
>
>>>>>> + return num_bytes;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +static int fsi_spi_data_out(u64 *out, const u8 *tx, int len)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>> Ditto as for above function. (put_unaligned ...)
>>> Ditto.
>>
>> I don't understand how this could work for transfers of less than 8
>> bytes, any put_unaligned would access memory that it doesn't own.
> Ditto.
>
>>>>>> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-07 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-29 20:08 Eddie James
2020-01-30 14:46 ` Mark Brown
2020-01-30 15:32 ` Eddie James
2020-01-30 16:37 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-03 20:33 ` Eddie James
2020-02-04 11:02 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-04 16:06 ` Eddie James
2020-02-05 15:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-07 19:28 ` Eddie James [this message]
2020-02-07 19:39 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-07 20:04 ` Eddie James
2020-02-07 20:34 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-07 20:59 ` Eddie James
2020-02-07 22:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-10 20:05 ` Eddie James
2020-02-10 20:33 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-02-10 20:50 ` Eddie James
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=90973143-bd0a-33cf-9eb8-a83be1a9b415@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=eajames@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=andrew@aj.id.au \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=eajames@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--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®