RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] spi: spi-mem: Add the spi_set_xfer_bpw function

From: Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@nxp.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Cc: "broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"linux-spi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"eha@deif.com" <eha@deif.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] spi: spi-mem: Add the spi_set_xfer_bpw function
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:48:31 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM0PR04MB4353252D3D6703FA14BCE4BA97EE0@AM0PR04MB4353.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180930124008.365831bf@bbrezillon>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
> Sent: 2018年9月30日 18:40
> To: Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@nxp.com>
> Cc: broonie@kernel.org; linux-spi@vger.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; eha@deif.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] spi: spi-mem: Add the spi_set_xfer_bpw function
> 
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:18:18 +0000
> Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@nxp.com> wrote:
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
> > > Sent: 2018年9月30日 18:04
> > > To: Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@nxp.com>
> > > Cc: broonie@kernel.org; linux-spi@vger.kernel.org;
> > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; eha@deif.com
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] spi: spi-mem: Add the spi_set_xfer_bpw
> > > function
> > >
> > > Hi Chuanhua,
> > >
> > > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 17:25:32 +0800
> > > Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@nxp.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Before we add this spi_transfer to the spi_message chain table, we
> > > > need bits_per_word_mask based on spi_control to set the
> > > > bits_per_word of this spi_transfer.
> > >
> > > Let's make it clearer: this is wrong. The spi-mem protocol is just
> > > using bytes, not custom size words. Fix the fsl-dspi driver if
> > > needed, but don't try to adjust
> > > xfer->bits_per_word in spi-mem.c, because this is inappropriate.
> > The value of bits_per_word is only known before the
> > spi_message_add_tail function is called,
> 
> No, it's not. It's known from the beginning, and spi_setup() defaults to 8 when
> spidev->bits_per_word is 0, which is exactly what we want. Then, when you
> send a message through, spi_sync(), spi_validate() makes sure that each
> transfer in the message has a
> xfer->bits_per_word != 0 and when that's not the case, it sets it to
> spi->bits_per_word [2].
> 
> Really, there's nothing to fix in spi-mem.c, because it's already doing the right
> thing (leaving ->bits_per_word to 0 so that it's set to
> spi->bits_per_word, which should be 8). Maybe we have a bug somewhere
> else though.
> 
> [1]https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Feli
> xir.bootlin.com%2Flinux%2Fv4.19-rc5%2Fsource%2Fdrivers%2Fspi%2Fspi.c%23
> L2803&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cchuanhua.han%40nxp.com%7C48694d5d7cd
> a460b3e0b08d626c11e3f%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7
> C0%7C636739008212287814&amp;sdata=5wYyFaZjk9kkbZtR0w0uS2YFlfNjC
> Gz3SN80Ws599j0%3D&amp;reserved=0
> [2]https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Feli
> xir.bootlin.com%2Flinux%2Fv4.19-rc5%2Fsource%2Fdrivers%2Fspi%2Fspi.c%23
> L2869&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cchuanhua.han%40nxp.com%7C48694d5d7cd
> a460b3e0b08d626c11e3f%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7
> C0%7C636739008212287814&amp;sdata=ibwl%2BZuk%2FMLagsudNetwgda
> hR1VVKBqI2ByL6225H50%3D&amp;reserved=0
I'll take the time to study this.
October 1 to October 7 is the National Day of our country. I need to take a vacation.
I may not reply to the email in time during this period. 
Thank you very much for your valuable advice!!!