On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 11:29 AM, padma venkat <padma.kvr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Jassi, > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 11:16 AM, padma venkat <padma.kvr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi Tony, >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Tony Nadackal <tonykn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Hi Padma, >>>> With regards to your patch, even though one can check the tx done status >>>> using the TX_DONE bit, the present macro itself would work perfectly fine if >>>> the 'fifo_lvl_mask' is set properly. >>>> For example in 6450 channel 1, the fifo_lvl_mask should be 0x1ff (for 9bits, >>>> 15:23), while even in your patch, it is wrongly set as 0x7f(only 7bits). >>>> >>>> Thus, if this fifo_lvl_mask was defined correctly, the existing macro would >>>> itself have worked. >>> Thanks for your comment. >>> I considered changing to the fifo_lvl_mask to 1ff as you mentioned. >>> But I think that the fifo_lvl_mask reflects the actual FIFO capacity >>> in the SPI driver. >>> For the failing channels the FIFO trigger level is 64 bytes and so i >>> retained that value. >>> In the driver it polls till the FIFO capacity level otherwise it goes >>> for DMA.So if we keep >>> the FIFO level as 1ff when the actual capacity is 7f then it fails. >>> >>> Jassi what do you think about this? >>> >> >> 'fifo_lvl_mask' is h/w specific and can't be set for convenience. >> >> I don't have access to post-s3c64xx datasheets. >> Please check and reply if TX_DONE bit is at same offset for all >> channels of an SoC, because >> I suspect it's otherwise. >> > Yes. The TX_DONE bit is at the same offset for all the channels of an SoC. > in S5P64X0,S5PV210 and S5PV310 it is at offset 25. > Then, Patches-1,2 Acked-by: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@xxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |