On 1/24/24 09:21, André Draszik wrote:
> Hi Tudor,
>
Hi!
> On Tue, 2024-01-23 at 15:34 +0000, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>> @@ -538,13 +538,8 @@ static int s3c64xx_wait_for_dma(struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd,
>> cpu_relax();
>> status = readl(regs + S3C64XX_SPI_STATUS);
>> }
>> -
>> }
>>
>> - /* If timed out while checking rx/tx status return error */
>> - if (!val)
>> - return -EIO;
>> -
>
> This change behaviour of this function. The loop just above adjusts val and it is used to
> determine if there was a timeout or not:
>
> if (val && !xfer->rx_buf) {
> val = msecs_to_loops(10);
> status = readl(regs + S3C64XX_SPI_STATUS);
> while ((TX_FIFO_LVL(status, sdd)
> || !S3C64XX_SPI_ST_TX_DONE(status, sdd))
> && --val) {
> cpu_relax();
> status = readl(regs + S3C64XX_SPI_STATUS);
> }
>
Oh, yes, the timeout in this block. You're right, I'll drop the patch.
Thanks!
ta
