Hi,
On 29/01/2019 15:27, Nicolas.Ferre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 29/01/2019 at 09:38, Jonas Bonn wrote:
+ /* DLYBCT adds delays between words. This is useful for slow devices
+ * that need a bit of time to setup the next transfer.
+ */
+ if (spi->word_delay_us) {
Well...
+ csr |= SPI_BF(DLYBCT,
+ clamp_t(u8,
+ (as->spi_clk/1000000*spi->word_delay_us)>>5,
+ 1, 255));
... why not simplifying to:
+ 0, 255));
and remove the test altogether, after all?
Hmm... that seemed too easy! This started out as something else and
looking at it now I think even the clamp_t() is unnecessary. The value
is already 0-255 and the way SPI_BF works any overflow is already
truncated... I'll rework this and resubmit once I get some feedback on
the word_delay_us bits.
Thanks,
/Jonas
