Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 14 May 2020 16:04:07 +0300
From:   Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
CC:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@microchip.com>,
        SoC Team <soc@kernel.org>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>,
        <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] spi: dw: Add support for polled operation via no
 IRQ specified in DT
Message-ID: <20200514130407.guyk3r4ltjvszy5s@mobilestation>
References: <20200513140031.25633-1-lars.povlsen@microchip.com>
 <20200513140031.25633-2-lars.povlsen@microchip.com>
 <20200513142050.GH4803@sirena.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200513142050.GH4803@sirena.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Mark

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 03:20:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 04:00:22PM +0200, Lars Povlsen wrote:
> > With this change a SPI controller can be added without having a IRQ
> > associated, and causing all transfers to be polled. For SPI controllers
> > without DMA, this can significantly improve performance by less
> > interrupt handling overhead.
> 
> This overlaps substantially with some work that Serge Semin (CCed) has
> in progress, please coordinate with him.

Thanks for copying me these mails. I haven't been Cc'ed in the series and
hasn't been subscribed to the SPI mailing list, so I would have definitely
missed that.

I would like to coordinate my efforts with Lars. I'll have the patchset reviewed
soon in addition providing my comments/suggestions of how to make it useful for
both mine and Lars solution.

One thing I can tell about the mem_ops he implemented, is that they aren't
mem_ops, but dirmap (as you remember it's also implemented in my code, but with
alignment specific), and the exec_mem_op partly consists of a code, which belong
to the supports_op() callback. The rest of my comments will be inlined in the
patches.

-Sergey