On 2019-04-26 at 11:09 +0200, Lucas Stach wrote:
>
> > static inline int is_imx53_ecspi(struct spi_imx_data *d)
> > @@ -585,9 +587,16 @@ static int mx51_ecspi_prepare_transfer(struct
> > spi_imx_data *spi_imx,
> > ctrl |= mx51_ecspi_clkdiv(spi_imx, t->speed_hz, &clk);
> > spi_imx->spi_bus_clk = clk;
> >
> > - /* ERR009165: work in XHC mode as PIO */
> > - if (spi_imx->usedma)
> > - ctrl &= ~MX51_ECSPI_CTRL_SMC;
> > + /*
> > + * ERR009165: work in XHC mode instead of SMC as PIO on the
> > chips
> > + * before i.mx6ul.
> > + */
> > + if (spi_imx->usedma) {
> > + if (spi_imx->devtype_data->devtype == IMX6UL_ECSPI)
> >
> > =, otherwise the workaround might be applied to later generations
> > of
> the core if more are added later.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
Understood your point, but for now choose different compatible name
could apply this workaround or not. I prefer to leave it for next ecspi
IP upgrade if it really come in the future, otherwise that '>=' bring
a little bit confuse if there is no update for ecspi IP...
