Hi Thomas,
On 22.03.2016 17:35, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:24:53 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
This patch adds support for the direct access mode to the Orion SPI
driver which is used on the Marvell Armada based SoCs. In this direct
mode, all data written to (or read from) a specifically mapped MBus
window (linked to one SPI chip-select on one of the SPI controllers)
will be transferred directly to the SPI bus. Without the need to control
the SPI registers in between. This can improve the SPI transfer rate in
such cases.
Both, direct-read and -write mode are supported. But only the write
mode has been tested. This mode especially benefits from the SPI direct
mode, as the data bytes are written head-to-head to the SPI bus,
without any additional addresses.
One use-case for this direct write mode is, programming a FPGA bitstream
image into the FPGA connected to the SPI bus at maximum speed.
This mode is described in chapter "22.5.2 Direct Write to SPI" in the
Marvell Armada XP Functional Spec Datasheet.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <sr@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Nadav Haklai <nadavh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Mark, sorry for the huge delay for v2 of this direct-access patch.
I was busy with other tasks in the meantime. And only found now
the time to address (hopefully all) of your comments.
Thanks for this new version! To be honest, I don't remember all the
discussions that took place on the v1, so maybe I'll just be re-asking
the same question.
No problem. Thanks for looking into this.
Has there been any discussion on whether dynamically adding the MBus
window is a good idea, as opposed to statically defining it in the
board .dts ?
Yes. My 1st patch version (still RFC) used fixed MBus windows instead:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-spi/msg06536.html
Mark suggested to use dynamic windows, so that one area could be
used for all SPI devices by switching (re-configuring) the MBus
window:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-spi/msg06537.html
So far, the only driver that was using dynamically allocated MBus is
the PCIe controller driver, because there is no way in advanced to know
the number and memory window requirements of the PCIe devices that will
be connected to the system.
For all other windows (BootROM, crypto SRAM and more recently network
related SRAM), we are using statically allocated windows.
So I'm wondering if we should add this additional DT binding that
describes the necessary information to allow the driver to dynamically
allocate a window, or if we shouldn't rely on a statically allocated
window.
This is really an open discussion, I don't have a very well-defined
opinion on the matter.
I also have no real preference here.
Let's Cc: Arnd Bergmann on this question, he has followed the whole
MBus story and might have some interesting insights.
Good idea.
Thanks,
Stefan
--
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
