Hi Lukas and Stefan, On Fri, 2019-06-28 at 21:00 +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 05:23:54PM +0200, Stefan Wahren wrote: > > Am 28.06.19 um 14:30 schrieb Nuno Sá: > > > As stated in > > > https://www.raspberrypi.org/documentation/hardware/raspberrypi/spi/README.md, > > > one of rx or tx buffer's must be null. However, if DMA is > > > enabled, the > > > driver sets the SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_RX | SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_TX > > > on the > > > controller flags. Hence, the spi core will provide dummy buffers > > > even if > > > one of the buffers was set to null by the device driver. Thus, > > > the > > > communication with the 3-wire device fails. > > > > > > This patch uses the prepare_message callback to look for the > > > device mode > > > and sets/clears the SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_RX | > > > SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_TX on a > > > per spi message basis. It also assumes that DMA is not supported > > > on > > > half-duplex devices. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > i never tested the 3-wire mode. Could you please describe your test > > setup? I'm working on a rpi cape which uses this device https://github.com/analogdevicesinc/linux/blob/master/drivers/iio/frequency/adf4371.c which is connected in 3-WIRE mode. I could confirm that spi was not working. > > __spi_validate() returns -EINVAL if 3-wire mode is used and both > buffers > are non-NULL, I guess that's the problem. In my case, __spi_validate() was ok because my device driver is passing one of rx or tx as NULL. The problem is in spi_map_msg() which allocates dummy buffers (because of the ctrl flags). As a result, in bcm2835_spi_transfer_one() we set "cs |= BCM2835_SPI_CS_REN;" when we want to do tx only. I believe this was the actual problem... > > > > @Martin, @Lukas Are you fine with this patch? > > I have a patch set in the pipeline to drop SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_RX > and SPI_CONTROLLER_MUST_TX from spi-bcm2835.c. > > Latest snapshot is available here (top-most 10 commits): > https://github.com/l1k/linux/commits/revpi_staging > > @Nuno, could you give this branch a spin and see if it fixes the > issue for you? If so, this might be a better solution. Your patch > is fine in principle since it works around the problem, but the > patch set on the above-linked branch fixes it at the root. > It also provides a nice welcome speedup and reduces resource > consumption. > > I've been working on this on-and-off for about half a year, > I think the patch set is in pretty good shape now so I was > planning to submit it probably in 2 weeks or so. > This looks great. I will try to give this a try still today. > Thanks, > > Lukas Regards, Nuno Sá