From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468C8C282C4 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 14:37:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 161AE2083B for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 14:37:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="XnYvKchg"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="W9wcUqx1" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 161AE2083B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=ad4Hn+XfmBfxQAvuvhOgoocCdkukfBUxV3ddUHKZECU=; b=XnYvKchgH9lMc5 c8jE56dr77JDeOSO9yBwuaIfBggsoTNt+q4nXjYKWrqpG32N/umch6hgfSfL9z5KQouhuGBCKqwE4 c8j434mE2zeFSpKAAqqy61OHqoERfuMe9pP8/eGoOOUDZ6e5rItYb1z5fG4iyHywhED3GF5l/v//f f6xrK4p48T0It/+mKhO+JaU/MJZKCcV6wbFBmD1rt4RBYwjemrDJFZrmJN81n0lfyPYVYSmQlkDqs rskU6X0ilVXEyoSfRPtZ/OazzZJU/fbLyHiQtAj88XSgSwEpN0OXF0URoYR7bJD1lb90oAniwWMpp 4e5yghalKIZ4wTdMRYCw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gqfNN-0006Qv-Pd; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 14:37:33 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gqfNA-0006FD-PF; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 14:37:22 +0000 Received: from bbrezillon (unknown [91.160.177.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D45D02083B; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 14:37:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1549291040; bh=AvnNVAT8ciem9UZ+hOBYnQRHq5c1WtwKWaoN/SqJE1o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=W9wcUqx16D0Z44oXAovv0qLuy8bpGQs+aMSlqCZXzffcFJmKWlBUjK5ogbIGVwKg0 g8MtQN46FSizXq4NUpNzF3mDpNvCbEJ5oL1BBmN8yk98YCq+3AteWrUZbeP/yTS5H+ eigbPgDylxQsz8W2VCwWZwQMPKiLCAZhXxajmkmg= Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:37:13 +0100 From: Boris Brezillon To: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 13/13] spi: atmel-quadspi: add support for sam9x60 qspi controller Message-ID: <20190204153713.2fd02769@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: <25f6ee72-e6e1-7014-6e4b-abe0a1a0eebc@microchip.com> References: <20190204100910.26701-1-tudor.ambarus@microchip.com> <20190204100910.26701-14-tudor.ambarus@microchip.com> <20190204151643.0354180d@bbrezillon> <25f6ee72-e6e1-7014-6e4b-abe0a1a0eebc@microchip.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190204_063720_837343_84869859 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.03 ) X-BeenThere: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Cyrille.Pitchen@microchip.com, Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com, broonie@kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, bugalski.piotr@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-mtd" Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 14:28:27 +0000 wrote: > > > >> + writel_relaxed(cfg->ifr, aq->regs + QSPI_IFR); > >> +} > > > > Hm, so the only difference we have is the RICR vs ICR reg and the > > APBTFRTYP_READ vs SAMA5D2_WRITE_TRSFR bit. Not sure it deserves > > creating 2 hooks for that. Can we have something like ->has_ricr in > > the caps and then have an if/else block directly in > > atmel_qspi_set_cfg()? > > > > Correct. It is a cost of an extra if, I tried to avoid it. I like it better with > these two hooks, but if you have a strong opinion I'll do it, just confirm it again. The cost of an indirect call is actually higher than an extra if/else block. I'm not against paying this extra cost when implementations are completely different, but that does not seem to be the case here. Moreover, if you get rid of these hooks, you can also get rid of the cfg struct. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/