> > Hi, Pekon > > What about the comment below, do I still need to check the mode before > setting. > I would suggest so :-) (a) 'mode == CPHA, CPOL' (b) 'mode==SPI_TX_QUAD | SPI_TX_DUAL' Though I would have suggested to add compatibility checks for both (a) and (b), so that all mis-matches are identified during device probe. But, as you patch newly adds (b), it would look complete if it adds compatibility for at-least (b). But if you are not keen, its okay. For your current patch.. Acked-by: Pekon Gupta <pekon@xxxxxx> with regards, pekon > >> You missed out comments provided earlier.. > >> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-August/048374.html > >> > >> Remember .. this compatibility check is between spi_device->mode > >> v/s spi_master->mode_bits. This is different from ur V3 patch > >> which checks for spi_transfer->tx_nbits v/s spi_device->mode. > >> > >> + if ((xfer->tx_nbits == SPI_NBITS_DUAL) && > >> + !(spi->mode & (SPI_TX_DUAL | SPI_TX_QUAD))) > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> + if ((xfer->tx_nbits == SPI_NBITS_QUAD) && > >> + !(spi->mode & SPI_TX_QUAD)) > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> > >> > > Sorry for my mis-understanding. But here I want to regard DUAL / QUAD > > mode just as other mode, such as CPHA, CPOL and so on. To other mode, > > spi framework didn't do such check, example: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > /* Mode (clock phase/polarity/etc.) */ > > if (of_find_property(nc, "spi-cpha", NULL)) > > spi->mode |= SPI_CPHA; > > if (of_find_property(nc, "spi-cpol", NULL)) > > spi->mode |= SPI_CPOL; > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Spi framework do this check in spi_setup as follow: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > bad_bits = spi->mode & ~spi->master->mode_bits; > > if (bad_bits) { > > dev_err(&spi->dev, "setup: unsupported mode bits %x\n", > > bad_bits); > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > So to keep that consistant, I don't think it is necessary to add the > > check when setting the mode. > > > > Best regards ��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
