On Tue, Jun 12 2018, Boris Brezillon wrote:

>
> Just because you managed to solve the problem in one driver does not
> mean the problem does not exist for others. I read this datasheet [1]
> several times and couldn't find a way to say 'I want to keep the CS
> asserted between 2 transactions', so I think we really need this patch.

I agree that my experience doesn't necessarily generalize.  As the patch
carried by signed-off-by (even though I only wrote little parts of it) I
wanted to make it clear that I had no desire to promote the patch -
maybe I stated that too strongly.

Thanks for the link to the data sheet.  I had a bit of a look, but
reading these things must be an art that I haven't fully mastered yet -
it would probably take me a few days to really understand it.
The Programmable Sequence Enginine (Section 10.2.5.3.1) seems
interesting. I wouldn't be surprised that that lets you do interesting
things.

It is obviously quite a powerful unit and it is surprising - to me -
that it might not allow arbitrarily long messages, but I cannot justify
the time to really dig in and see if that is the case.
Maybe you are right.  I have no particular objections to the patch, I
just don't want to be seen as speaking in favour of it.

Thanks,
NeilBrown


>
> Regards,
>
> Boris
>
> [1]https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/reference-manual/VFXXXRM.pdf