On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 05:40:31PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 5:28 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It's what we do for other properties, and if this is anything like the > > other things adding extra wiring you can't assume that the ability to > > use the feature for TX implies RX. > Double Transfer Rate uses the same wire. But is it still on either the TX or RX signals? > But as you sample at both the rising and the falling edges of the clock, this > makes the cpha setting meaningless for such transfers, I think ;-) Might affect what the first bit is possibly? > However, as the future may bring us QDR, perhaps this should not be a > boolean flag, but an integer value? > Cfr. spi-tx-bus-width vs. the original spi-tx-dual/spi-tx-quad proposal. > What would be a good name (as we only need one)? spi-data-phases? Sounds reasonable, apart from the increasingly vague connection with something that's recognizably SPI :P
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
