Hello Naveen and Mark,
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
<javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Naveen Krishna Ch
> <naveenkrishna.ch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> >> Hence, spi-s3c64xx.c is broken since "Jun 21 11:26:12 2013" and
>>>> >> considering the time with no compliants about the breakage.
>>>
>>>> > I'm not clear what the breakage is? Some boards are broken but what's
>>>> > the driver issue?
>>>
>>>> ToT was broken for few boards
>>>> exynos4412-trats2.dts, exynos4210-smdkv310.dts and exynos5250-smdk5250.dts
>>>
>>>> With some DTS changes SPI works well, spi-s3c64xx.c driver had no issues.
>>>
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that the driver does have issues
> since the commit mentioned (3146bee) broke DT backward compatibility.
>
>>> No, you're not answering my question - to repeat, what is the breakage?
>>
>
> As far as I understand, the breakage is that any DTS that followed the
> DT binding documented in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt is not working
> with the current driver. So is not that some boards are broken, is
> that the driver is broken and it has been broken for more than a year
> (the commit date is Jun 21 2013).
>
>> The Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-samsung.txt
>> describes "cs-gpio" as a controller specific property.
>>
>> The dts entries for SPI in exynos4412-trats2.dts, exynos4210-smdkv310.dts
>> and exynos5250-smdk5250.dts boards have the "cs-gpio" property defined
>> under controller-data node, which is inside the SPI device node
>> &spi_1 {
>> controller-data {
>> cs-gpio = <>;
>> };
>> };
>>
>> But, _probe() of spi-s3c64xx.c driver looks for "cs-gpio" in the SPI
>> device node and
>> sets a flag "sdd->cs_gpio = false" (If the property is not available)
>> &spi_1 {
>> cs-gpio = <>;
>> };
>>
>> the sdd->cs_gpio flag is checked before actually getting the gpios
>> from the controller-data node
>> if (sdd->cs_gpio)
>> cs->line = of_get_named_gpio(data_np, "cs-gpio", 0);
>>
>
> I think that if changing the binding is not possible, at least we
> should document this new "cs-gpio" property that is looked in the top
> level SPI node after commit 3146bee and also revert the default in
> order to allow DTs using the old binding to keep working.
>
> By default not having the "cs-gpio" property in the SPI dev node
> should mean that the "cs-gpio" property in the controller-data node
> should be used to signal the chip-select and having the "cs-gpio"
> property in the SPI node should mean that the native chip select
> should be used instead of a GPIO. That preserves the old DT binding
> semantic while making the GPIO to be optional.
>
> Of course in that case the property name does not make too much sense,
> so probably should be changed to "cs-native" or something like that.
> But I still don't understand why this is needed in the first place
> since according to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-bus.txt
> you can use the cs-gpios property to specify that a native chip-select
> will be used instead of a GPIO by doing:
>
> cs-gpios = <&gpio1 0 0> <0>
>
> cs0 : &gpio1 0 0
> cs1 : native
>
>> Hence, SPI was failing on those boards.
>>
>> 1. As the SPI core and several drivers were changed to work with
>> DT property "cs-gpios" (plural) defined under SPI node.
>> 2. Since the commit 3146beec21b64f4551fcf0ac148381d54dc41b1b
>> "spi: s3c64xx: Added provision for dedicated cs pin"
>> Dated: Fri Jun 21 11:26:12 2013 +0530
>>
>> For the above 2 reasons, It was decided to drop the backward compatibility
>> of using "cs-gpio"(singular) in controller-data.
>> Instead, start supporting "cs-gpios"(plural) in the SPI node.
>>
>
> Right, since the DT binding has been broken for a year and because is
> not consistent with the bindings used by all other SPI drivers, many
> agreed that it was one of the exceptional cases where the DT binding
> can be rethought and changed to use the generic "cs-gpios" property
> already supported by SPI core. It breaks backward compatibility that's
> true but the DT binding has been broken anyways and nobody noticed
> before.
>
> The other option is what I said above, fixing the DT binding
> compatibility breakage while keeping the custom binding for this SPI
> driver.
>
>>>
>>>> > Also I'd need to check but are you sure that GPIO 0 is not valid?
>>>
>>>> gpio_is_valid() returns true for
>>>> "number >= 0 && number < ARCH_NR_GPIOS"
>>>
>>> Right, so this means that any board that is using the internal chip
>>> select with zero as default in their platform data is broken by this
>>> change.
>>
>
> I think this problem could be present in other SPI drivers as well? So
> maybe the right fix for this is to convert the SPI core gpio handling
> to use the new descriptor-based gpio API instead of the integer-base
> one?
>
>> using gpio_is_valid() to "sdd->cs_gpio" flag every where to check for the
>> validity was a review comment.
>> Which seems to fail for internal chip select with zero.
>>
>> I can submit another version with"sdd->cs_gpio" flag for this purpose.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> (: Nav :)
>> --
Any more opinions on this issue?
It would be great if we can move this forward since there are other
series that depend on these fixes.
Best regards,
Javier
--
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
