Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] spi: support inter-word delay requirement for
 devices
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>,
        lanqing.liu@spreadtrum.com
References: <20190126163220.26421-1-jonas@norrbonn.se>
 <20190126163220.26421-2-jonas@norrbonn.se>
 <20190128181038.GF11699@sirena.org.uk>
From:   Jonas Bonn <jonas@norrbonn.se>
Message-ID: <1b9807aa-3e6e-16f2-a2c2-ebe5e186d904@norrbonn.se>
Date:   Mon, 28 Jan 2019 22:28:14 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190128181038.GF11699@sirena.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 28/01/2019 19:10, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 05:32:19PM +0100, Jonas Bonn wrote:
> 
>> @@ -164,6 +166,7 @@ struct spi_device {
>>   	char			modalias[SPI_NAME_SIZE];
>>   	const char		*driver_override;
>>   	int			cs_gpio;	/* chip select gpio */
>> +	uint16_t		word_delay;	/* inter-word delay (us) */
> 
> This needs some code in the core joining it up with the per-transfer
> word delay similar to what we have for speed_hz and bits_per_word in
> __spi_validate().  Then the controller drivers can just look at the
> per-transfer value and support both without having to duplicate logic.
> 

So spi_transfer already has a field word_delay and it's defined as 
_clock cycles_ to delay between words.  I defined word_delay in 
spi_device as _microseconds_ to delay along the lines of delay_usecs.

Given that the inter-word delay is a function of the slave device speed 
and not of the SPI bus speed, I'm inclined to say that a time-based 
delay is what we want (to be independent of bus speed).  As such, I want 
to know if I should add word_delay_usecs to _both_ spi_transfer and 
spi_device?

There's only one user of word_delay from spi_transfer.  Just looking at 
it quickly, it looks like it wants the word_delay in 
SPI-controller-clock cycles and not SCK cycles which seems pretty broken 
to me.  Adding Baolin and Lanqing to CC: for comment.  Could we rework 
that to be microseconds and do the calculation in the driver?

Thanks,
Jonas