Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] spi: amd: Don't wait for a write-only transfer to finish

[Charles Keepax <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Lucas Tanure wrote:
> Return from a write-only transfer without waiting for
> it to finish
> But wait before a new transfer as the previous may
> still happening and also wait before reading the data
> from the FIFO
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lucas Tanure <tanureal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> -static void amd_spi_execute_opcode(struct amd_spi *amd_spi)
> +static int amd_spi_execute_opcode(struct amd_spi *amd_spi)
>  {
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = amd_spi_busy_wait(amd_spi);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
>  	/* Set ExecuteOpCode bit in the CTRL0 register */
>  	amd_spi_setclear_reg32(amd_spi, AMD_SPI_CTRL0_REG, AMD_SPI_EXEC_CMD, AMD_SPI_EXEC_CMD);
> -	amd_spi_busy_wait(amd_spi);
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static int amd_spi_master_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
> @@ -178,6 +185,7 @@ static inline int amd_spi_fifo_xfer(struct amd_spi *amd_spi,
>  			amd_spi_clear_fifo_ptr(amd_spi);
>  			/* Execute command */
>  			amd_spi_execute_opcode(amd_spi);
> +			amd_spi_busy_wait(amd_spi);

Surely the previous transfer can't still be happening if this if
unconditional? Should this not be gated on rx_len?

Thanks,
Charles

>  			/* Read data from FIFO to receive buffer  */
>  			for (i = 0; i < rx_len; i++)
>  				buf[i] = amd_spi_readreg8(amd_spi, AMD_SPI_FIFO_BASE + tx_len + i);
> -- 
> 2.33.0
>