Re: [PATCH v2 10/19] spi: dw: Use DMA max burst to set the request thresholds

[Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 3:53 PM Serge Semin
<Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 02:03:43PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 11:01:33PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 05:38:42PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 01:47:49PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:

...

> > > > >         struct dma_chan         *txchan;
> > > > > +       u32                     txburst;
> > > > >         struct dma_chan         *rxchan;
> > > > > +       u32                     rxburst;
> > > >
> > > > Leave u32 together, it may be optimal on 64-bit architectures where ABIs require padding.
> > >
> > > It's not like anyone cared about padding in this structure in the first place)
> >
> > I think I have been caring (to some extend).
>
> Well, If you have then instead of asking to rearrange just two members (which
> by the way finely grouped by the Tx-Rx affiliation) why not sending a
> patch, which would refactor the whole structure so to be optimal for the x64
> platforms? I don't really see why this gets very important for you seeing
> Mark is Ok with this. My current commit follows the common driver design
> including the DW SSI data members grouping. On the second thought I'll leave
> it as is then.

Again same issue here. What is really easy to do for you here, will
become a burden and additional churn to anybody else.
So, why not to minimize it in the first place? Same with comma in
another patch. Sorry, I really don't get it.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko