On Wed, 2016-06-01 at 20:00 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 04:50:16PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 05:28:10PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote: > > > > > > On 30 May 2016 at 17:03, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I really don't think it's worth caring too much about cases > > > > where the > > > > DMA driver hasn't been compiled in, it's not like SPI is the > > > > only thing > > > > > > It's what the driver did to start with and it was requested to > > > fall > > > back to non-DMA in the case DMA is not available. > > Why? I really can't see any sensible use case for this that > > doesn't > > have a better solution available. > SPI works just fine without DMA, which might just be considered an > (optional) optimisation. > > We've been using it without DMA for years now, and it was working > just > fine, and it will work even better with the other patches in this > serie. There's no reason to add a hard dependency on something that > we > don't really need. > Actually it non-DMA case works fine if you don't need SPI transfers larger than SUN4I_FIFO_DEPTH - 1, which is 63 bytes. This was addressed by this patch, but was never applied: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.spi.devel/18950 -- 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