On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 06:35:39PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Yes indeed. Therefore in v3 I took a different approach : a flag .cs_off > tells to spi_transfer_one_message() that a given transfer has to be > performed with chipselect OFF, therefore the consumer has full control > of how and when to add those additional fake clock cycles during a > transfer, and can eventually add one at anyplace during the transfer. > Here an exemple of what will do the consumer. Hrm, we should already be able to synthesize that with cs_change though there's usability challenges there and AFAICT it doesn't work for the first transfer which your proposal would so there's a functional benefit even if you don't need it for your device right now. It would be good if you could have a look at using cs_change for your use case. Sorry, I don't think I'd fully realised what you were looking to accomplish here until I saw your proposal.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
