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;
Date:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:19:22 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To:     Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        linux-realtek-soc@lists.infradead.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Dan Murphy <dmurphy@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 04/25] spi: gpio: Implement LSB First bitbang support
Message-ID: <20191212171922.GM4310@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20191212033952.5967-1-afaerber@suse.de>
 <20191212033952.5967-5-afaerber@suse.de>
 <CAMuHMdWdxJ9AaWhyCW-u8fCpXSDCPd-D6Dx129SF5nRssZsK=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <9b4b6287-c1d9-1b41-88a8-7ac9fe222642@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EOHJn1TVIJfeVXv2"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9b4b6287-c1d9-1b41-88a8-7ac9fe222642@suse.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


--EOHJn1TVIJfeVXv2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 04:14:59PM +0100, Andreas F=E4rber wrote:
> Am 12.12.19 um 09:40 schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven:
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 4:41 AM Andreas F=E4rber <afaerber@suse.de> wro=
te:
> >> Add support for slave DT property spi-lsb-first, i.e., SPI_LSB_FIRST m=
ode.

> >> Duplicate the inline helpers bitbang_txrx_be_cpha{0,1} as LE versions.
> >> Make checkpatch.pl happy by changing "unsigned" to "unsigned int".

Separate patch for this?

> So from that angle I don't see a better way than either duplicating the
> functions or using some macro magic to #include the header twice. If we
> wanted to go down that path, we could probably de-duplicate the existing
> two functions, too, but I was trying to err on the cautious side, since
> I don't have setups to test all four code paths myself (and a ton of
> more relevant but less fun patches to flush out ;)).

Yeah, I don't think there's any great options here with the potential
performance issues - probably the nicest thing would be to autogenerate
lots of variants but I think that's far more trouble than it's worth.

--EOHJn1TVIJfeVXv2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAl3ydpkACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9Crxwf9Hh/o+0lRcCax6Pd2t3iPgF+uG4xJ6LUUNfzNsOdYWHhRoEJC3NQAdbh+
erqhW4a1HuHtkFy9hM1gCLsfRyr9eA3x0+xVgj9WsbOe11mebr08oS+BaPHU2yUT
4XgXr/Fyi1s2x6q3R9C48jEGRyKy6nCKC9Lkh8dXitfznpmufSAEKzkYxZLo8hPs
At9L7La3QdwGjOTgHJ0DZD9Q6gQpsjhzWA8fkgHwzwjGsaw6pZair0XkaBPcg3/q
xyZyIzQejgHy5DhWRg9m+WSsoARvtMwSGv+061AOmafWOPBgAWM2z1wCH/+F0jqM
q/B0X6vyCHo7spdDxq+dhgsXrkrcBQ==
=OqPq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--EOHJn1TVIJfeVXv2--