Hi Heiner, On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 8:53 PM, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am 06.06.2016 um 19:40 schrieb Mark Brown: >> On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 12:22:37AM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >>> Am 06.05.2016 um 14:14 schrieb Mark Brown: >>>> 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. >> >>> I'd like to come back to this discussion. You said best would be >>> to fix the chip driver. To do this and calculate an appropriate >>> value for max_transfer_size the chip driver would have to know that >>> the spi_device is a spi-nor device. >> >> That doesn't make any sense, the controller hardware doesn't >> magically change based on what is connected to it. >> > The issue with fsl-espi is that the controller deactivates CS after > each physical transfer. And a lot of HW designs use the hardware CS, > therefore the advise to use a GPIO instead doesn't really help. And you can't use pinmux to configure the pin used for hardware CS to become a GPIO? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- 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