On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 06:07:26PM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > Introduce the interrupt handler for enhanced spi to read or write based > on the generated irq. Also, use the xfer_completion from spi_controller > to wait for a timeout or completion from irq handler. > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/spi/spi-dw-core.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-dw-core.c b/drivers/spi/spi-dw-core.c > index f540165245a89..10d453228368f 100644 > --- a/drivers/spi/spi-dw-core.c > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-dw-core.c > @@ -251,6 +251,34 @@ static irqreturn_t dw_spi_transfer_handler(struct dw_spi *dws) > return IRQ_HANDLED; > } > > +static irqreturn_t dw_spi_enh_handler(struct dw_spi *dws) > +{ > + u16 irq_status = dw_readl(dws, DW_SPI_ISR); > + > + if (dw_spi_check_status(dws, false)) { > + spi_finalize_current_transfer(dws->master); As I suggested in the cover-letter please use the dw_spi_dma_wait() function for that. > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > + } > + > + if (irq_status & DW_SPI_INT_RXFI) { > + dw_reader(dws); > + if (dws->rx_len <= dw_readl(dws, DW_SPI_RXFTLR)) > + dw_writel(dws, DW_SPI_RXFTLR, dws->rx_len - 1); > + } > + > + if (irq_status & DW_SPI_INT_TXEI) > + dw_writer(dws); > + > + if (!dws->tx_len && dws->rx_len) { > + dw_spi_mask_intr(dws, DW_SPI_INT_TXEI); > + } else if (!dws->rx_len && !dws->tx_len) { > + dw_spi_mask_intr(dws, 0xff); > + spi_finalize_current_transfer(dws->master); Why so complicated? You have two types of the transfers: Tx-only and Rx-only. Thus you can unmask only one type of the IRQs and terminate the process upon both lengths are zero. > + } > + > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > +} > + > static irqreturn_t dw_spi_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > { > struct spi_controller *master = dev_id; > @@ -265,6 +293,12 @@ static irqreturn_t dw_spi_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > dw_spi_mask_intr(dws, 0xff); > return IRQ_HANDLED; > } > + if ((dws->transfer_handler == dw_spi_enh_handler && > + !dws->rx_len && !dws->tx_len)) { > + dw_spi_mask_intr(dws, 0xff); > + spi_finalize_current_transfer(master); > + return IRQ_HANDLED; Why? You already have this statement in the handler above. > + } > > return dws->transfer_handler(dws); > } > @@ -862,6 +896,8 @@ static int dw_spi_exec_enh_mem_op(struct spi_mem *mem, const struct spi_mem_op * > struct spi_controller *ctlr = mem->spi->controller; > struct dw_spi *dws = spi_controller_get_devdata(ctlr); > struct dw_spi_cfg cfg; > + int ret = 0; > + unsigned long long ms; > > switch (op->data.buswidth) { > case 2: > @@ -909,11 +945,35 @@ static int dw_spi_exec_enh_mem_op(struct spi_mem *mem, const struct spi_mem_op * > > dw_spi_update_config(dws, mem->spi, &cfg); > > + dw_spi_mask_intr(dws, 0xff); > + reinit_completion(&ctlr->xfer_completion); > dw_spi_enable_chip(dws, 1); > > dw_spi_enh_write_cmd_addr(dws, op); > + dw_spi_set_cs(mem->spi, false); > + dw_spi_irq_setup(dws, dw_spi_enh_handler); > > - return 0; > + /* Use timeout calculation from spi_transfer_wait() */ > + ms = 8LL * MSEC_PER_SEC * (dws->rx_len ? dws->rx_len : dws->tx_len); > + do_div(ms, dws->current_freq); > + > + /* > + * Increase it twice and add 200 ms tolerance, use > + * predefined maximum in case of overflow. > + */ > + ms += ms + 200; > + if (ms > UINT_MAX) > + ms = UINT_MAX; > + > + ms = wait_for_completion_timeout(&ctlr->xfer_completion, > + msecs_to_jiffies(ms)); All of that is already implemented in the dw_spi_dma_wait() method. Moreover addr+cmd write procedure, IRQ setup and wait-for-completion can be consolidate in the dw_spi_enh_write_then_read() function thus having the dw_spi_enh_exec_mem_op method looking similar to the standard dw_spi_exec_mem_op(). -Serge(y) > + > + dw_spi_stop_mem_op(dws, mem->spi); > + > + if (ms == 0) > + ret = -EIO; > + > + return ret; > } > > /* > -- > 2.30.2 >