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