Re: [RFC/PATCHv2 3/3] spi: dw-spi: Pointers select 16b vs. 32b DesignWare access
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On 03/07/2015 01:52 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 1:46 AM, <tthayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Thor Thayer <tthayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Altera's Arria10 SoC interconnect requires a 32 bit write for APB
peripherals. The current spi-dw driver uses 16bit accesses in
some locations. Use function pointers to support 32 bit accesses
but retain legacy 16 bit access.
Thanks for this version. My comments below.
Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <tthayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/spi/spi-dw-mmio.c | 7 ++++++-
drivers/spi/spi-dw.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
drivers/spi/spi-dw.h | 12 ++++++++++++
3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-dw-mmio.c b/drivers/spi/spi-dw-mmio.c
index eb03e12..c4fe9e9 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-dw-mmio.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-dw-mmio.c
@@ -76,8 +76,13 @@ static int dw_spi_mmio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
num_cs = 4;
- if (pdev->dev.of_node)
+ if (pdev->dev.of_node) {
of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "num-cs", &num_cs);
+ if (of_property_read_bool(pdev->dev.of_node, "32bit_access")) {
+ dws->read_w = dw_readw32;
+ dws->write_w = dw_writew32;
Can we use just readw/writew (w/o underscores) as names for the accessors?
I tried this initially and got a namespace conflict with the readw &
write2 macros.
macro writew passed 3 arguments, but takes just 2
macro readw passed 2 arguments, but takes just 1
+ }
+ }
dws->num_cs = num_cs;
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-dw.c b/drivers/spi/spi-dw.c
index c5fa2be..d008791 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-dw.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-dw.c
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static inline u32 tx_max(struct dw_spi *dws)
u32 tx_left, tx_room, rxtx_gap;
tx_left = (dws->tx_end - dws->tx) / dws->n_bytes;
- tx_room = dws->fifo_len - dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLR);
+ tx_room = dws->fifo_len - dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLR);
/*
* Another concern is about the tx/rx mismatch, we
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ static inline u32 rx_max(struct dw_spi *dws)
{
u32 rx_left = (dws->rx_end - dws->rx) / dws->n_bytes;
- return min_t(u32, rx_left, dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_RXFLR));
+ return min_t(u32, rx_left, dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_RXFLR));
}
static void dw_writer(struct dw_spi *dws)
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ static void dw_writer(struct dw_spi *dws)
else
txw = *(u16 *)(dws->tx);
}
- dw_writew(dws, DW_SPI_DR, txw);
+ dws->write_w(dws, DW_SPI_DR, txw);
dws->tx += dws->n_bytes;
}
}
@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ static void dw_reader(struct dw_spi *dws)
u16 rxw;
while (max--) {
- rxw = dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_DR);
+ rxw = dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_DR);
/* Care rx only if the transfer's original "rx" is not null */
if (dws->rx_end - dws->len) {
if (dws->n_bytes == 1)
@@ -254,11 +254,11 @@ static void int_error_stop(struct dw_spi *dws, const char *msg)
static irqreturn_t interrupt_transfer(struct dw_spi *dws)
{
- u16 irq_status = dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_ISR);
+ u16 irq_status = dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_ISR);
/* Error handling */
if (irq_status & (SPI_INT_TXOI | SPI_INT_RXOI | SPI_INT_RXUI)) {
- dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_ICR);
+ dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_ICR);
int_error_stop(dws, "interrupt_transfer: fifo overrun/underrun");
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
@@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ static irqreturn_t dw_spi_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
struct spi_master *master = dev_id;
struct dw_spi *dws = spi_master_get_devdata(master);
- u16 irq_status = dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_ISR) & 0x3f;
+ u16 irq_status = dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_ISR) & 0x3f;
if (!irq_status)
return IRQ_NONE;
@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int dw_spi_transfer_one(struct spi_master *master,
cr0 |= (chip->tmode << SPI_TMOD_OFFSET);
}
- dw_writew(dws, DW_SPI_CTRL0, cr0);
+ dws->write_w(dws, DW_SPI_CTRL0, cr0);
/* Check if current transfer is a DMA transaction */
dws->dma_mapped = map_dma_buffers(master, spi, transfer);
@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ static int dw_spi_transfer_one(struct spi_master *master,
*/
if (!dws->dma_mapped && !chip->poll_mode) {
txlevel = min_t(u16, dws->fifo_len / 2, dws->len / dws->n_bytes);
- dw_writew(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR, txlevel);
+ dws->write_w(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR, txlevel);
/* Set the interrupt mask */
imask |= SPI_INT_TXEI | SPI_INT_TXOI |
@@ -516,11 +516,11 @@ static void spi_hw_init(struct device *dev, struct dw_spi *dws)
u32 fifo;
for (fifo = 1; fifo < 256; fifo++) {
- dw_writew(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR, fifo);
- if (fifo != dw_readw(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR))
+ dws->write_w(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR, fifo);
+ if (fifo != dws->read_w(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR))
break;
}
- dw_writew(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR, 0);
+ dws->write_w(dws, DW_SPI_TXFLTR, 0);
dws->fifo_len = (fifo == 1) ? 0 : fifo;
dev_dbg(dev, "Detected FIFO size: %u bytes\n", dws->fifo_len);
@@ -545,6 +545,11 @@ int dw_spi_add_host(struct device *dev, struct dw_spi *dws)
dws->dma_addr = (dma_addr_t)(dws->paddr + 0x60);
snprintf(dws->name, sizeof(dws->name), "dw_spi%d", dws->bus_num);
+ if (!dws->read_w)
+ dws->read_w = dw_readw;
+ if (!dws->write_w)
+ dws->write_w = dw_writew;
+
ret = devm_request_irq(dev, dws->irq, dw_spi_irq, IRQF_SHARED,
dws->name, master);
if (ret < 0) {
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h b/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h
index 855bfdd..1df09e2 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h
@@ -141,6 +141,8 @@ struct dw_spi {
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
struct dentry *debugfs;
#endif
+ u16 (*read_w)(struct dw_spi *dws, u32 offset);
+ void (*write_w)(struct dw_spi *dws, u32 offset, u16 val);
};
static inline u32 dw_readl(struct dw_spi *dws, u32 offset)
@@ -163,6 +165,16 @@ static inline void dw_writew(struct dw_spi *dws, u32 offset, u16 val)
__raw_writew(val, dws->regs + offset);
}
+static inline u16 dw_readw32(struct dw_spi *dws, u32 offset)
+{
+ return (u16)__raw_readl(dws->regs + offset);
+}
+
+static inline void dw_writew32(struct dw_spi *dws, u32 offset, u16 val)
+{
+ __raw_writel((u32)val, dws->regs + offset);
+}
+
So, does simple
dws->readw = dw_readl;
dws->writew = dw_writel;
work for you?
Yes, but I get the macro conflict shown above and "assignment from
incompatible pointer type" warnings. If I use the dws->read_w and
dws->write_w names, I get the incompatible pointer type warnings but it
works.
Thanks for reviewing.
static inline void spi_enable_chip(struct dw_spi *dws, int enable)
{
dw_writel(dws, DW_SPI_SSIENR, (enable ? 1 : 0));
--
1.7.9.5
--
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
--
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
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux ARM (vger)]
[Linux ARM MSM]
[Linux Omap]
[Linux Arm]
[Linux Tegra]
[Fedora ARM]
[Linux for Samsung SOC]
[eCos]
[Linux Fastboot]
[Gcc Help]
[Git]
[DCCP]
[IETF Announce]
[Security]
[Linux MIPS]
[Yosemite Campsites]
|
