On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Add support for the MSIOF variant in the R-Car H2 (r8a7790) and M2 > (r8a7791) SoCs. > > Binding documentation: > - Add future-proof "renesas,msiof-<soctype>" compatible values, > - Add example bindings. > > Implementation: > - MSIOF on R-Car H2 and M2 requires the transmission of dummy data if > data is being received only (cfr. "Set SICTR.TSCKE to 1" and "Write > dummy transmission data to SITFDR" in paragraph "Transmit and Receive > Procedures" of the Hardware User's Manual). > - As RX depends on TX, MSIOF on R-Car H2 and M2 also lacks the RSCR > register (Receive Clock Select Register), and some bits in the RMDR1 > (Receive Mode Register 1) and TMDR2 (Transmit Mode Register 2) > registers. > - Use the recently introduced SPI_MASTER_MUST_TX flag to enable support > for dummy transmission in the SPI core, and to differentiate from other > MSIOF implementations in code paths that need this. > - New DT compatible values ("renesas,msiof-r8a7790" and > "renesas,msiof-r8a7791") are added, as well as new platform device > names ("spi_r8a7790_msiof" and "spi_r8a7791_msiof"). > - Hardware features are indicated using a new struct sh_msiof_chipdata, > which is used for both DT and legacy binding. For now this contains the > SPI master flags only. > > This is loosely based on a set of patches from Takashi Yoshii > <takasi-y@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Takashi Yoshii <takasi-y@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/sh-msiof.txt | 21 +++++++- > drivers/spi/spi-sh-msiof.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++---- > 2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-sh-msiof.c b/drivers/spi/spi-sh-msiof.c > index 92515c1ececa..31624fb4997d 100644 > --- a/drivers/spi/spi-sh-msiof.c > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-sh-msiof.c > @@ -659,6 +671,23 @@ static u32 sh_msiof_spi_txrx_word(struct spi_device *spi, unsigned nsecs, > } > > #ifdef CONFIG_OF > +static const struct sh_msiof_chipdata sh_data = { > + .master_flags = 0, > +}; > + > +static const struct sh_msiof_chipdata r8a779x_data = { > + .master_flags = SPI_MASTER_MUST_TX, > +}; > + > +static const struct of_device_id sh_msiof_match[] = { > + { .compatible = "renesas,sh-msiof", .data = &sh_data }, > + { .compatible = "renesas,sh-mobile-msiof", .data = &sh_data }, > + { .compatible = "renesas,msiof-r8a7790", .data = &r8a779x_data }, > + { .compatible = "renesas,msiof-r8a7791", .data = &r8a779x_data }, > + {}, > +}; > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sh_msiof_match); Hi Geert, Thanks for your patches. They all look good in general I think. On thing stuck out a bit with the bindings. I can see that you specify both fifo size and use the SoC suffix for the r8a7790 and r8a7791 bindings. Isn't that a bit of redundant information there, if we know that the SoC is r8a7790 or r8a7791 then can't we simply put that information in r8a779x_data above and perhaps keep the binding simpler? Perhaps same thing applies to other properties as well? Cheers, / magnus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html