Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1675227 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH linux-next v4 2/4] spi: imx: add selection for iMX53 and iMX6 controller

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH linux-next v4 2/4] spi: imx: add selection for iMX53 and  iMX6 controller Jiada Wang <jiada_wang@mentor.com> - 2017-06-27 03:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH linux-next v4 2/4] spi: imx: add selection for iMX53 and  iMX6 controller Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2017-06-28 21:30 +0200

#1675227 — Re: [PATCH linux-next v4 2/4] spi: imx: add selection for iMX53 and iMX6 controller

Hello Mark and Sascha

Could you please review my v4 patch set for i.MX SPI slave support

Thanks,
Jiada

On 06/13/2017 07:29 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Jiada Wang<jiada_wang@mentor.com>  wrote:
>> Hello Rob
>>
>>
>> On 06/13/2017 12:53 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 02:16:01PM +0900, Jiada Wang wrote:
>>>> ECSPI contorller for iMX53 and iMX6 has few hardware issues
>>>> comparing to iMX51.
>>>> The change add possibility to detect which controller is used
>>>> to apply possible workaround and limitations.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jiada Wang<jiada_wang@mentor.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   .../devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl-imx-cspi.txt       |  1 +
>>>>   drivers/spi/spi-imx.c                              | 26
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>   2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl-imx-cspi.txt
>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl-imx-cspi.txt
>>>> index 31b5b21..5bf1396 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl-imx-cspi.txt
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl-imx-cspi.txt
>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ Required properties:
>>>>     - "fsl,imx31-cspi" for SPI compatible with the one integrated on
>>>> i.MX31
>>>>     - "fsl,imx35-cspi" for SPI compatible with the one integrated on
>>>> i.MX35
>>>>     - "fsl,imx51-ecspi" for SPI compatible with the one integrated on
>>>> i.MX51
>>>> +  - "fsl,imx53-ecspi" for SPI compatible with the one integrated on
>>>> i.MX53 and later Soc
>>>>   - reg : Offset and length of the register set for the device
>>>>   - interrupts : Should contain CSPI/eCSPI interrupt
>>>>   - cs-gpios : Specifies the gpio pins to be used for chipselects.
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-imx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-imx.c
>>>> index 4469121..8e6f339 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-imx.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-imx.c
>>>> @@ -63,7 +63,8 @@ enum spi_imx_devtype {
>>>>          IMX27_CSPI,
>>>>          IMX31_CSPI,
>>>>          IMX35_CSPI,     /* CSPI on all i.mx except above */
>>>> -       IMX51_ECSPI,    /* ECSPI on i.mx51 and later */
>>>> +       IMX51_ECSPI,    /* ECSPI on i.mx51 */
>>>> +       IMX53_ECSPI,    /* ECSPI on i.mx53 and later */
>>>
>>> Looks like i.MX51 and i.MX53 are the same. While the DT should have
>>> different compatibles (with fallbacks), the driver should map them to
>>> the same type until there's some difference found.
>>>
>> the difference between i.MX51 and i.MX53 is introduced in the
>> 4th patch "spi: imx: Add support for SPI Slave mode" in this patch set
> Okay, I missed that.
>
>> do you think, I need to merge the two patches into one?
> No, not necessary.
>
> Acked-by: Rob Herring<robh@kernel.org>
>
> Rob

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1677092

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 06:25:52PM -0700, Jiada Wang wrote:
> Hello Mark and Sascha
> 
> Could you please review my v4 patch set for i.MX SPI slave support

Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so 
on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.
Sending content free pings just adds to the mail volume (if they are
seen at all) and if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the
patches anyway.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web