[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] kirkwood spi_claim/release_bus support
This series adds generic support for the spi_claim/release_bus functions for the kirkwood processors.
The implementation was already discussed in another thread following my first board specific submission of the patch.
The series adds two functions to the kirkwood mpp code to be able to temporarily save and then restore the mpp configuration.
Valentin Longchamp (3): kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions spi/kirkwood: add weak functions board_spi_claim/release_bus
arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c | 18 +++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h | 2 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h | 9 ++++++ drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 4 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
These 2 functions can be used in pair if one needs to set a mpp configuration only for a given time and then switch back to the previous mpp config.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com --- arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c index 3da6c98..43f5053 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c @@ -80,3 +80,21 @@ void kirkwood_mpp_conf(u32 *mpp_list) debug("\n");
} + +u32 mpp_regs[MPP_NR_REGS]; + +void kirkwood_mpp_save(void) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++) + mpp_regs[i] = readl(MPP_CTRL(i)); +} + +void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++) + writel(mpp_regs[i], MPP_CTRL(i)); +} diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h index b3c090e..da65b4d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h @@ -313,5 +313,7 @@ #define MPP_MAX 49
void kirkwood_mpp_conf(unsigned int *mpp_list); +void kirkwood_mpp_save(void); +void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void);
#endif
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
These 2 functions can be used in pair if one needs to set a mpp configuration only for a given time and then switch back to the previous mpp config.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com
arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c index 3da6c98..43f5053 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c @@ -80,3 +80,21 @@ void kirkwood_mpp_conf(u32 *mpp_list) debug("\n");
}
+u32 mpp_regs[MPP_NR_REGS];
This is optional feature only used in this specific case. No global here, this should be part of caller function.
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
+{
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++)
mpp_regs[i] = readl(MPP_CTRL(i));+}
+void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void)
Same here void kirkwood_mpp_restore(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
+{
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++)
writel(mpp_regs[i], MPP_CTRL(i));+} diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h index b3c090e..da65b4d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h @@ -313,5 +313,7 @@ #define MPP_MAX 49
void kirkwood_mpp_conf(unsigned int *mpp_list); +void kirkwood_mpp_save(void); +void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void);
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
Am Donnerstag 24 Mai 2012, 10:26:44 schrieb Prafulla Wadaskar:
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
+{
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++)
mpp_regs[i] = readl(MPP_CTRL(i));+}
+void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void)
Same here void kirkwood_mpp_restore(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
or even better kirkwood_mpp_restore(const unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
btw. sometimes "unsigned int" is used and sometimes "u32", could we agree on one? Eg. kirkwood_mpp_conf() is declared with unsigned int but defined with u32.
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Walle [mailto:michael@walle.cc] Sent: 29 May 2012 03:38 To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar; Valentin Longchamp; holger.brunck@keymile.com Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
Am Donnerstag 24 Mai 2012, 10:26:44 schrieb Prafulla Wadaskar:
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
+{
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++)
mpp_regs[i] = readl(MPP_CTRL(i));+}
+void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void)
Same here void kirkwood_mpp_restore(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
or even better kirkwood_mpp_restore(const unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
btw. sometimes "unsigned int" is used and sometimes "u32", could we agree on one? Eg. kirkwood_mpp_conf() is declared with unsigned int but defined with u32.
Hi Michael
Thanks for your comments.
Yes, we should use u32. And const will be a problem since mpp_ctrl will be array that will be dynamically modified.
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
Am Dienstag 29 Mai 2012, 14:42:08 schrieb Prafulla Wadaskar:
And const will be a problem since mpp_ctrl will be array that will be dynamically modified.
But not within kirkwood_mpp_restore(), right? So an mpp_ctrl array would be implicitly casted from u32* to const u32*.
so we would have the following declarations: kirkwood_mpp_restore(const u32 *mpp_list) kirkwood_mpp_conf(const u32 *mpp_list) kirkwood_mpp_save(u32 *mpp_list)
where only the latter modifies mpp_list.
On 05/24/2012 10:26 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
These 2 functions can be used in pair if one needs to set a mpp configuration only for a given time and then switch back to the previous mpp config.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com
arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c index 3da6c98..43f5053 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c @@ -80,3 +80,21 @@ void kirkwood_mpp_conf(u32 *mpp_list) debug("\n");
}
+u32 mpp_regs[MPP_NR_REGS];
This is optional feature only used in this specific case. No global here, this should be part of caller function.
I wanted this patch to be independant of the SPI claim bus that _currently_ is the only one using it, but who knows in the future.
Anyway if this isn't global here, it will have to be global in the kirkwood_spi.c driver since it would have to be shared between spi_claim_bus and spi_release_bus.
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
Here we save _all_ mpp registers, with direct access to the registers. With your proposed solution, I would save it in a dynamically allocated table of size len.
That's fine for me, but I would then need to export MPP_NR_REGS, because that is what I would pass as len arg, is that OK ?
+{
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++)
mpp_regs[i] = readl(MPP_CTRL(i));+}
+void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void)
Same here void kirkwood_mpp_restore(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
+{
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++)
writel(mpp_regs[i], MPP_CTRL(i));+} diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h index b3c090e..da65b4d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/mpp.h @@ -313,5 +313,7 @@ #define MPP_MAX 49
void kirkwood_mpp_conf(unsigned int *mpp_list); +void kirkwood_mpp_save(void); +void kirkwood_mpp_restore(void);
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:15 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
...snip...
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
Here we save _all_ mpp registers, with direct access to the registers. With your proposed solution, I would save it in a dynamically allocated table of size len.
That's fine for me, but I would then need to export MPP_NR_REGS, because that is what I would pass as len arg, is that OK ?
I think in your case you need configuration of 4 MPPs, i.e. from MPP6 to MPP11, so you may declare array of length 7 and backup and restore the same MPPs using len = 6.
No Need to backup and restore all MPPs.
Regards... Prafulla . . .
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:15 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
...snip...
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
Here we save _all_ mpp registers, with direct access to the registers. With your proposed solution, I would save it in a dynamically allocated table of size len.
That's fine for me, but I would then need to export MPP_NR_REGS, because that is what I would pass as len arg, is that OK ?
I think in your case you need configuration of 4 MPPs, i.e. from MPP6 to MPP11, so you may declare array of length 7 and backup and restore the same MPPs using len = 6.
No Need to backup and restore all MPPs.
Sorry, but this is exactly what you did in the kirkwood_mpp_conf function, you read and write all the registers every time you need to change only one pin, I took it from there for consistency:
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar 2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 76) for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++) { 4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar 2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 77) writel(mpp_ctrl[i], MPP_CTRL(i)); 4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar 2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 78) debug(" %08x", mpp_ctrl[i]); 4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar 2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 79) }
And the way you did it is logical, if it was not done like that, a lot of reading/masking/rewriting would be needed, and this for every single pin, so it would be much less efficient than just reading all the regs and write them all back.
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 16:59 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:15 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
...snip...
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
Here we save _all_ mpp registers, with direct access to the
registers.
With your proposed solution, I would save it in a dynamically allocated table
of
size len.
That's fine for me, but I would then need to export MPP_NR_REGS, because that is what I would pass as len arg, is that OK ?
I think in your case you need configuration of 4 MPPs, i.e. from
MPP6 to MPP11, so you may declare array of length 7 and backup and restore the same MPPs using len = 6.
No Need to backup and restore all MPPs.
Sorry, but this is exactly what you did in the kirkwood_mpp_conf function, you read and write all the registers every time you need to change only one pin, I took it from there for consistency:
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 76) for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++) {
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 77) writel(mpp_ctrl[i], MPP_CTRL(i));
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 78) debug(" %08x", mpp_ctrl[i]);
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 79) }
And the way you did it is logical, if it was not done like that, a lot of reading/masking/rewriting would be needed, and this for every single pin, so it would be much less efficient than just reading all the regs and write them all back.
Yes, but the idea is that mpp_config function is called just once during initialization, we have exposed a simple array to do this configuration.
but save/restore will be called very frequently, may be for each SPI transaction. So there must be some optimisation. Secondly, we should only tweak only needed MPPs in run time, why all? It may lead to some other side effects (I don't know).
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
On 05/29/2012 02:06 PM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 16:59 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:15 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
...snip...
+void kirkwood_mpp_save(void)
This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
Here we save _all_ mpp registers, with direct access to the
registers.
With your proposed solution, I would save it in a dynamically allocated table
of
size len.
That's fine for me, but I would then need to export MPP_NR_REGS, because that is what I would pass as len arg, is that OK ?
I think in your case you need configuration of 4 MPPs, i.e. from
MPP6 to MPP11, so you may declare array of length 7 and backup and restore the same MPPs using len = 6.
No Need to backup and restore all MPPs.
Sorry, but this is exactly what you did in the kirkwood_mpp_conf function, you read and write all the registers every time you need to change only one pin, I took it from there for consistency:
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 76) for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS; i++) {
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 77) writel(mpp_ctrl[i], MPP_CTRL(i));
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 78) debug(" %08x", mpp_ctrl[i]);
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 79) }
And the way you did it is logical, if it was not done like that, a lot of reading/masking/rewriting would be needed, and this for every single pin, so it would be much less efficient than just reading all the regs and write them all back.
Yes, but the idea is that mpp_config function is called just once during initialization, we have exposed a simple array to do this configuration.
but save/restore will be called very frequently, may be for each SPI transaction. So there must be some optimisation.
Secondly, we should only tweak only needed MPPs in run time, why all? It may lead to some other side effects (I don't know).
With the proposed code, all are saved and restored, but not all are tweaked. Furthermore, maybe reading and writing back 7 registers and is more efficient than determining which one of the 7 have to be read/written back and then performing the accesses.
However, if you tell me that mpp_config function is supposed to be called just once during initialization, I will propose a new function that optimizes these reg accesses as you would prefer it, but the best optimization potential is to avoid to call the 2 mpp_config and mpp_save functions.
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 18:20 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
On 05/29/2012 02:06 PM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 16:59 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:15 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
...snip...
> + > +void kirkwood_mpp_save(void) This should be void kirkwood_mpp_save(unsigned int *mpp_ctrl, int len)
Here we save _all_ mpp registers, with direct access to the
registers.
With your proposed solution, I would save it in a dynamically allocated
table
of
size len.
That's fine for me, but I would then need to export MPP_NR_REGS, because that is what I would pass as len arg, is that OK ?
I think in your case you need configuration of 4 MPPs, i.e. from
MPP6 to MPP11, so you may declare array of length 7 and backup and restore the same MPPs using len = 6.
No Need to backup and restore all MPPs.
Sorry, but this is exactly what you did in the kirkwood_mpp_conf function, you read and write all the registers every time you need to change only one pin, I took it from there for consistency:
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 76) for (i = 0; i < MPP_NR_REGS;
i++)
{
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 77) writel(mpp_ctrl[i], MPP_CTRL(i));
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 78) debug(" %08x", mpp_ctrl[i]);
4efb77d4 cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/mpp.c (Prafulla Wadaskar
2009-06-20 11:01:53 +0200 79) }
And the way you did it is logical, if it was not done like that, a
lot
of reading/masking/rewriting would be needed, and this for every
single
pin, so it would be much less efficient than just reading all the regs and
write
them all back.
Yes, but the idea is that mpp_config function is called just once
during initialization, we have exposed a simple array to do this configuration.
but save/restore will be called very frequently, may be for each SPI
transaction. So there must be some optimisation.
Secondly, we should only tweak only needed MPPs in run time, why
all? It may lead to some other side effects (I don't know).
With the proposed code, all are saved and restored, but not all are tweaked. Furthermore, maybe reading and writing back 7 registers and is more efficient than determining which one of the 7 have to be read/written back and then performing the accesses.
However, if you tell me that mpp_config function is supposed to be called just once during initialization, I will propose a new function that optimizes these
New ideas are always welcomed, let's keep is separate from this context.
reg accesses as you would prefer it, but the best optimization potential is to avoid to call the 2 mpp_config and mpp_save functions.
I think, Kirkwood_mpp_config (already supported) finally writes the said MPP configurations to the SoC,
If we can have just Kirkwood_mpp_read() function that reads the MPP configuration for the said MPP will be enough from mpp.c prospective. This function should return the MPP config value in the same way it is being programmed by Kirkwood_mpp_config() function.
In SPI driver we will use these functions to handle the claim/release/backup the MPP attributes.
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
Dear Prafulla Wadaskar,
this is offtopic in this thread, but I tried contacting you about thrice by now via email, maybe you didn't get those mails. To get quickly to the point, can you please try cleaning up the patches in patchwork?
Thanks!
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Dear Marek
I did few cleanups in patchwork? I will check if further more is needed.
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
-----Original Message----- From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marek.vasut@gmail.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 20:17 To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar; Valentin Longchamp; holger.brunck@keymile.com Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
Dear Prafulla Wadaskar,
this is offtopic in this thread, but I tried contacting you about thrice by now via email, maybe you didn't get those mails. To get quickly to the point, can you please try cleaning up the patches in patchwork?
Thanks!
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Dear Prafulla Wadaskar,
Dear Marek
I did few cleanups in patchwork? I will check if further more is needed.
I just checked, it seems it's all gone now, only a few crumbles left :)
Sorry I kept pestering you so much.
Thanks a lot for cleaning it up!
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
-----Original Message----- From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marek.vasut@gmail.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 20:17 To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar; Valentin Longchamp; holger.brunck@keymile.com Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] kirkwood: add kirkwood_mpp_save/restore functions
Dear Prafulla Wadaskar,
this is offtopic in this thread, but I tried contacting you about thrice by now via email, maybe you didn't get those mails. To get quickly to the point, can you please try cleaning up the patches in patchwork?
Thanks!
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Best regards, Marek Vasut
These two function nows ensure that the MPP is configured correctly for the SPI controller before any SPI access, and restore the initial configuration when the access is over.
Since the used pins for the SPI controller can differ (2 possibilities for each signal), the used pins are configured with CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com --- arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h | 9 ++++++++ drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h index 1d5043f..305c573 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h @@ -37,6 +37,15 @@ struct kwspi_registers { u32 irq_mask; /* 0x10614 */ };
+#define CSn_MPP7 0x1 +#define MOSI_MPP6 0x2 +#define SCK_MPP10 0x4 +#define MISO_MPP11 0x8 + +#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP +#define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP 0x0 +#endif + #define KWSPI_CLKPRESCL_MASK 0x1f #define KWSPI_CSN_ACT 1 /* Activates serial memory interface */ #define KWSPI_SMEMRDY (1 << 1) /* SerMem Data xfer ready */ diff --git a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c index db8ba8b..0877915 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c @@ -88,11 +88,45 @@ void spi_free_slave(struct spi_slave *slave)
int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) { + u32 config; + u32 spi_mpp_config[5]; + + config = CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP; + + if (config & CSn_MPP7) + spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP7_SPI_SCn; + else + spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP0_SPI_SCn; + + if (config & MOSI_MPP6) + spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP6_SPI_MOSI; + else + spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP1_SPI_MOSI; + + if (config & SCK_MPP10) + spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP10_SPI_SCK; + else + spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP2_SPI_SCK; + + if (config & MISO_MPP11) + spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP11_SPI_MISO; + else + spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP3_SPI_MISO; + + spi_mpp_config[4] = 0; + + /* save current mpp configuration */ + kirkwood_mpp_save(); + + /* finally set chosen mpp spi configuration */ + kirkwood_mpp_conf(spi_mpp_config); + return 0; }
void spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) { + kirkwood_mpp_restore(); }
#ifndef CONFIG_SPI_CS_IS_VALID
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 2/3] spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions
These two function nows ensure that the MPP is configured correctly for the SPI controller before any SPI access, and restore the initial configuration when the access is over.
Since the used pins for the SPI controller can differ (2 possibilities for each signal), the used pins are configured with CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h | 9 ++++++++ drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h index 1d5043f..305c573 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h @@ -37,6 +37,15 @@ struct kwspi_registers { u32 irq_mask; /* 0x10614 */ };
+#define CSn_MPP7 0x1 +#define MOSI_MPP6 0x2 +#define SCK_MPP10 0x4 +#define MISO_MPP11 0x8
Let's define above as (1 << x) to make it more readable.
+#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP +#define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP 0x0
Some more documentation is needed, you need to explain how each bit we are using to configure the SPI-MPPs
+#endif
#define KWSPI_CLKPRESCL_MASK 0x1f #define KWSPI_CSN_ACT 1 /* Activates serial memory interface */ #define KWSPI_SMEMRDY (1 << 1) /* SerMem Data xfer ready */ diff --git a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c index db8ba8b..0877915 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c @@ -88,11 +88,45 @@ void spi_free_slave(struct spi_slave *slave)
int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
Instead define here #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP, otherwise build with default.
- u32 config;
- u32 spi_mpp_config[5];
- config = CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP;
- if (config & CSn_MPP7)
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP7_SPI_SCn;- else
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP0_SPI_SCn;- if (config & MOSI_MPP6)
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP6_SPI_MOSI;- else
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP1_SPI_MOSI;- if (config & SCK_MPP10)
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP10_SPI_SCK;- else
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP2_SPI_SCK;- if (config & MISO_MPP11)
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP11_SPI_MISO;- else
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP3_SPI_MISO;- spi_mpp_config[4] = 0;
- /* save current mpp configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_save();
- /* finally set chosen mpp spi configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_conf(spi_mpp_config);
- return 0;
}
void spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
- kirkwood_mpp_restore();
}
#ifndef CONFIG_SPI_CS_IS_VALID
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
1.7.1
On 05/24/2012 10:35 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 2/3] spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions
These two function nows ensure that the MPP is configured correctly for the SPI controller before any SPI access, and restore the initial configuration when the access is over.
Since the used pins for the SPI controller can differ (2 possibilities for each signal), the used pins are configured with CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h | 9 ++++++++ drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h index 1d5043f..305c573 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h @@ -37,6 +37,15 @@ struct kwspi_registers { u32 irq_mask; /* 0x10614 */ };
+#define CSn_MPP7 0x1 +#define MOSI_MPP6 0x2 +#define SCK_MPP10 0x4 +#define MISO_MPP11 0x8
Let's define above as (1 << x) to make it more readable.
OK
+#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP +#define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP 0x0
Some more documentation is needed, you need to explain how each bit we are using to configure the SPI-MPPs
Not sure I understand what you mean here. But I think that you mean that I would have to document that bit 1 is for CSn signal (MPP0 or MPP7), bit 2 for MOSI signal (MPP1 or MPP6) and so on ... OK will do it.
Would you want me to define CSn_MPP0 as 0x0 (or (0 << 0) ) and MOSI_MPP1 as 0x0 and so on as well ?
+#endif
#define KWSPI_CLKPRESCL_MASK 0x1f #define KWSPI_CSN_ACT 1 /* Activates serial memory interface */ #define KWSPI_SMEMRDY (1 << 1) /* SerMem Data xfer ready */ diff --git a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c index db8ba8b..0877915 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c @@ -88,11 +88,45 @@ void spi_free_slave(struct spi_slave *slave)
int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
Instead define here #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP, otherwise build with default.
OK, if you prefer it this way, it is fine for me. This implies that I have to remove the above #ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP and that the boards that want to use this will have to #define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP in their config.
- u32 config;
- u32 spi_mpp_config[5];
- config = CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP;
- if (config & CSn_MPP7)
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP7_SPI_SCn;- else
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP0_SPI_SCn;- if (config & MOSI_MPP6)
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP6_SPI_MOSI;- else
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP1_SPI_MOSI;- if (config & SCK_MPP10)
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP10_SPI_SCK;- else
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP2_SPI_SCK;- if (config & MISO_MPP11)
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP11_SPI_MISO;- else
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP3_SPI_MISO;- spi_mpp_config[4] = 0;
- /* save current mpp configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_save();
- /* finally set chosen mpp spi configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_conf(spi_mpp_config);
- return 0;
}
void spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
- kirkwood_mpp_restore();
}
#ifndef CONFIG_SPI_CS_IS_VALID
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:02 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions
On 05/24/2012 10:35 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck;
Prafulla
Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 2/3] spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions
These two function nows ensure that the MPP is configured correctly for the SPI controller before any SPI access, and restore the initial configuration when the access is over.
Since the used pins for the SPI controller can differ (2
possibilities
for each signal), the used pins are configured with CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h | 9 ++++++++ drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h index 1d5043f..305c573 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h @@ -37,6 +37,15 @@ struct kwspi_registers { u32 irq_mask; /* 0x10614 */ };
+#define CSn_MPP7 0x1 +#define MOSI_MPP6 0x2 +#define SCK_MPP10 0x4 +#define MISO_MPP11 0x8
Let's define above as (1 << x) to make it more readable.
OK
+#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP +#define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP 0x0
Some more documentation is needed, you need to explain how each bit
we are using to configure the SPI-MPPs
Not sure I understand what you mean here. But I think that you mean that I would have to document that bit 1 is for CSn signal (MPP0 or MPP7), bit 2 for MOSI signal (MPP1 or MPP6) and so on ... OK will do it.
Exactly,
Would you want me to define CSn_MPP0 as 0x0 (or (0 << 0) ) and MOSI_MPP1 as 0x0 and so on as well ?
Use any four bits for four configuration, I would suggest to use bit0 to bit-3.
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
+#endif
#define KWSPI_CLKPRESCL_MASK 0x1f #define KWSPI_CSN_ACT 1 /* Activates serial memory interface */ #define KWSPI_SMEMRDY (1 << 1) /* SerMem Data xfer ready */ diff --git a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c
b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c
index db8ba8b..0877915 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c @@ -88,11 +88,45 @@ void spi_free_slave(struct spi_slave *slave)
int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
Instead define here #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP, otherwise build with default.
OK, if you prefer it this way, it is fine for me. This implies that I have to remove the above #ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP and that the boards that want to use this will have to #define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP in their config.
- u32 config;
- u32 spi_mpp_config[5];
- config = CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP;
- if (config & CSn_MPP7)
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP7_SPI_SCn;- else
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP0_SPI_SCn;- if (config & MOSI_MPP6)
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP6_SPI_MOSI;- else
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP1_SPI_MOSI;- if (config & SCK_MPP10)
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP10_SPI_SCK;- else
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP2_SPI_SCK;- if (config & MISO_MPP11)
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP11_SPI_MISO;- else
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP3_SPI_MISO;- spi_mpp_config[4] = 0;
- /* save current mpp configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_save();
- /* finally set chosen mpp spi configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_conf(spi_mpp_config);
- return 0;
}
void spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
- kirkwood_mpp_restore();
}
#ifndef CONFIG_SPI_CS_IS_VALID
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
On 05/29/2012 12:29 PM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:02 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions
On 05/24/2012 10:35 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck;
Prafulla
Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 2/3] spi/kirkwood: support spi_claim/release_bus functions
These two function nows ensure that the MPP is configured correctly for the SPI controller before any SPI access, and restore the initial configuration when the access is over.
Since the used pins for the SPI controller can differ (2
possibilities
for each signal), the used pins are configured with CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h | 9 ++++++++ drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h index 1d5043f..305c573 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/spi.h @@ -37,6 +37,15 @@ struct kwspi_registers { u32 irq_mask; /* 0x10614 */ };
+#define CSn_MPP7 0x1 +#define MOSI_MPP6 0x2 +#define SCK_MPP10 0x4 +#define MISO_MPP11 0x8
Let's define above as (1 << x) to make it more readable.
OK
+#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP +#define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP 0x0
Some more documentation is needed, you need to explain how each bit
we are using to configure the SPI-MPPs
Not sure I understand what you mean here. But I think that you mean that I would have to document that bit 1 is for CSn signal (MPP0 or MPP7), bit 2 for MOSI signal (MPP1 or MPP6) and so on ... OK will do it.
Exactly,
Would you want me to define CSn_MPP0 as 0x0 (or (0 << 0) ) and MOSI_MPP1 as 0x0 and so on as well ?
Use any four bits for four configuration, I would suggest to use bit0 to bit-3.
That's already how it is implemented ...:
bit 0: selects pin for CSn (MPP0 if 0, MPP7 if 1) bit 1: selects pin for MOSI (MPP1 if 0, MPP6 if 1) bit 2: selects pin for SCK (MPP2 if 0, MPP10 if 1) bit 3: selects pin for MISO (MPP3 if 0, MPP11 if 1)
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
+#endif
#define KWSPI_CLKPRESCL_MASK 0x1f #define KWSPI_CSN_ACT 1 /* Activates serial memory interface */ #define KWSPI_SMEMRDY (1 << 1) /* SerMem Data xfer ready */ diff --git a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c
b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c
index db8ba8b..0877915 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c @@ -88,11 +88,45 @@ void spi_free_slave(struct spi_slave *slave)
int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
Instead define here #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP, otherwise build with default.
OK, if you prefer it this way, it is fine for me. This implies that I have to remove the above #ifndef CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP and that the boards that want to use this will have to #define CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP in their config.
- u32 config;
- u32 spi_mpp_config[5];
- config = CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP;
- if (config & CSn_MPP7)
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP7_SPI_SCn;- else
spi_mpp_config[0] = MPP0_SPI_SCn;- if (config & MOSI_MPP6)
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP6_SPI_MOSI;- else
spi_mpp_config[1] = MPP1_SPI_MOSI;- if (config & SCK_MPP10)
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP10_SPI_SCK;- else
spi_mpp_config[2] = MPP2_SPI_SCK;- if (config & MISO_MPP11)
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP11_SPI_MISO;- else
spi_mpp_config[3] = MPP3_SPI_MISO;- spi_mpp_config[4] = 0;
- /* save current mpp configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_save();
- /* finally set chosen mpp spi configuration */
- kirkwood_mpp_conf(spi_mpp_config);
- return 0;
}
void spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) {
- kirkwood_mpp_restore();
}
#ifndef CONFIG_SPI_CS_IS_VALID
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
This allows a final, board specific, step in the claim/relase_bus function for the SPI controller, which may be needed for some hardware designs.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com --- drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c index 0877915..0e4db45 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/kirkwood_spi.c @@ -86,6 +86,11 @@ void spi_free_slave(struct spi_slave *slave) free(slave); }
+__attribute__((weak)) int board_spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) +{ + return 0; +} + int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) { u32 config; @@ -121,12 +126,18 @@ int spi_claim_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) /* finally set chosen mpp spi configuration */ kirkwood_mpp_conf(spi_mpp_config);
- return 0; + return board_spi_claim_bus(slave); +} + +__attribute__((weak)) void board_spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) +{ }
void spi_release_bus(struct spi_slave *slave) { kirkwood_mpp_restore(); + + board_spi_release_bus(slave); }
#ifndef CONFIG_SPI_CS_IS_VALID
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 3/3] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions board_spi_claim/release_bus
This allows a final, board specific, step in the claim/relase_bus function for the SPI controller, which may be needed for some hardware designs.
NAK, this is not needed if earlier two patches in the patch series are in place.
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
On 05/24/2012 10:38 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; Prafulla Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 3/3] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions board_spi_claim/release_bus
This allows a final, board specific, step in the claim/relase_bus function for the SPI controller, which may be needed for some hardware designs.
NAK, this is not needed if earlier two patches in the patch series are in place.
In our case, this is still needed. As I had already explained you in the previous discussion, even with the generic approach, our hardware design requires one access to an additional signal (a GPIO) to configure an external HW multiplexer which is present to electrically remove the Nand Flash device from the signals used by the SPI bus and put it back when the accesses are over.
That's why my first implementation was only relying on these weak functions.
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 29 May 2012 14:03 To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: holger.brunck@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions board_spi_claim/release_bus
On 05/24/2012 10:38 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@keymile.com] Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.brunck@keymile.com Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck;
Prafulla
Wadaskar Subject: [PATCH 3/3] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions board_spi_claim/release_bus
This allows a final, board specific, step in the claim/relase_bus function for the SPI controller, which may be needed for some
hardware
designs.
NAK, this is not needed if earlier two patches in the patch series
are in place.
In our case, this is still needed. As I had already explained you in the previous discussion, even with the generic approach, our hardware design requires one access to an additional signal (a GPIO) to configure an external HW multiplexer which is present to electrically remove the Nand Flash device from the signals used by the SPI bus and put it back when the accesses are over.
That's why my first implementation was only relying on these weak functions.
Okay, got it, on your board, apart from MPPs, you need additional control.
BTW: if NF_CEn could have been used this additional GPIO would not have needed. But any ways we cannot change your h/w now :-) So in that case it makes sense to expose these weak functions.
Regards.. Prafulla . . .
participants (4)
-
Marek Vasut -
Michael Walle -
Prafulla Wadaskar -
Valentin Longchamp