On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 04:57:00PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:09:56PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > > 2. At least in the case of fsl-espi the size limit refers to one > > physical transfer (including the command) and therefore to the sum > > of all transfers. > > We should change > > + t[1].len = min_t(size_t, len, spi_max_transfer_size(spi)); > > to > > + t[1].len = min(len, spi_max_transfer_size(spi) - t[0].len); > > > > Apart from that the patch set looks good to me. > That's not what Mark specified here: > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2015-November/063616.html > and that's not what the API's very *name* means; it says max transfer > size (where a spi_transfer is a very well-defined concept). You need to > fix the driver or take up the API issues with Mark if you want to > suggest we interpret this differently. Yes, it's called the maximum transfer size because it is the maximum size of a transfer, not because it's the maximum size of a message.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
