Quoting Jarkko Sakkinen (2019-08-19 09:32:40)
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 03:36:18PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Cr50 firmware has a different flow control protocol than the one used by
> > this TPM PTP SPI driver. Introduce a flow control callback so we can
> > override the standard sequence with the custom one that Cr50 uses.
> >
> > Cc: Andrey Pronin <apronin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Guenter Roeck <groeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Alexander Steffen <Alexander.Steffen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c
> > index 19513e622053..819602e85b34 100644
> > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_spi.c
> > @@ -42,6 +42,8 @@
> > struct tpm_tis_spi_phy {
> > struct tpm_tis_data priv;
> > struct spi_device *spi_device;
> > + int (*flow_control)(struct tpm_tis_spi_phy *phy,
> > + struct spi_transfer *xfer);
> > u8 *iobuf;
> > };
> >
> > @@ -50,12 +52,39 @@ static inline struct tpm_tis_spi_phy *to_tpm_tis_spi_phy(struct tpm_tis_data *da
> > return container_of(data, struct tpm_tis_spi_phy, priv);
> > }
> >
> > +static int tpm_tis_spi_flow_control(struct tpm_tis_spi_phy *phy,
> > + struct spi_transfer *spi_xfer)
> > +{
> > + struct spi_message m;
> > + int ret, i;
> > +
> > + if ((phy->iobuf[3] & 0x01) == 0) {
> > + // handle SPI wait states
> > + phy->iobuf[0] = 0;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < TPM_RETRY; i++) {
> > + spi_xfer->len = 1;
> > + spi_message_init(&m);
> > + spi_message_add_tail(spi_xfer, &m);
> > + ret = spi_sync_locked(phy->spi_device, &m);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + if (phy->iobuf[0] & 0x01)
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (i == TPM_RETRY)
> > + return -ETIMEDOUT;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> AFAIK the flow control is not part of the SPI standard itself but is
> proprietary for each slave device. Thus, the flow control should be
> documented to the source code. I do not want flow control mechanisms to
> be multiplied before this is done.
Can you clarify this please? I don't understand what "the flow control
should be documented to the source code" means.
>
> The magic number 0x01 would be also good to get rid off.
>
Ok. What name should the #define be? I can make that another patch.
