From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vladimir Oltean Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] spi: Do spi_take_timestamp_pre for as many times as necessary Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 15:13:53 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20200304220044.11193-1-olteanv@gmail.com> <20200304220044.11193-8-olteanv@gmail.com> <20200305121202.GB4046@sirena.org.uk> <20200305130448.GC4046@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: linux-spi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, lkml , Esben Haabendal , angelo-BIYBQhTR83Y@public.gmane.org, andrew.smirnov-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" , Wei Chen , Mohamed Hosny To: Mark Brown Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20200305130448.GC4046-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-spi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 15:04, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 03:00:22PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 14:12, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > This is a fix and so should have been at the start of the series to make > > > sure there aren't any dependencies. > > > My reasoning for not submitting it as a fix is: > > - The only driver that uses the functionality so far - spi-fsl-dspi - > > has worked thus far even with the limitation that only byte-by-byte > > transfers were supported properly. > > - I removed the limitation before actually changing the operating mode > > of spi-fsl-dspi. Therefore the limitation is effectively never seen. > > - New SPI drivers that would want to make use of software timestamping > > would do so through your SPI for-next branch anyway, where the > > limitation would be, again, fixed. > > That's mostly all true but it's still better to pull fixes like this (or > the patch limiting the size) forwards and not have to think if it's safe > to not apply them as a fix, it's less effort all round. So do you want me to do something about it now?