On 06/05, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 11:14:33AM +0200, Nuno Sá wrote:
> > On Tue, 2024-06-04 at 19:41 -0300, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
>
> > > + /* Check against conflicting MOSI idle configuration */
> > > + if ((spi->mode & SPI_MOSI_IDLE_LOW) && (spi->mode &
> > > SPI_MOSI_IDLE_HIGH)) {
> > > + dev_warn(&spi->dev,
> > > + "setup: erratic MOSI idle configuration. Set to idle
> > > low\n");
> > > + spi->mode &= ~SPI_MOSI_IDLE_HIGH;
> > > + }
>
> > Should we assume such a thing? IOW, should this be treated as a warning or a
> > real error? I would assume this should be a configuration error and return -
> > EINVAL but...
>
> Right, and the error message isn't very clear.
Yeah, the message is not all that clear. I'll think of something better.
I'm biased towards having this as a warning because I don't see this as a
feature of usual SPI protocol but not really sure about either ...
