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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2D7916FA-678F-4236-B478-C953CADF2FFA@goldelico.com>
 <CAGngYiXgc_m2A7Wihxuhzm-u4qH-JZgxHjke653zvyT45jMU7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <4AC29229-9542-4E77-B993-217E29C7E209@goldelico.com> <20201201121620.GB5239@sirena.org.uk>
 <A499CCB9-F2EC-4F24-AA79-5A7FA6A092A9@goldelico.com> <CACRpkdYf2dUF6PjYcvnsKDPoxXPWiWKKAqpik4-2AAQjRmatfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6283C16F-549C-4463-BC08-E2C1A1D78B2F@goldelico.com> <CAGngYiUG76Q-cb_HdDKMia5yXzv_mS+5NPeaBquK3_4b3tr-4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <9380CE00-9CE6-4E0B-B2E1-1B534F85E47D@goldelico.com> <CAGngYiVF5yMAGPJ8xZgt=BfJ3JfBMABVC0t+dQ2oOq986T9iKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <BD3995F3-F4E6-4DC9-B0B9-5DCD6655F049@goldelico.com> <CAGngYiXWo4QEDF73wa7RDah1yUUOO1URoD_k5Fd5JMqSL2JXGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <A88317FA-52CC-41D3-B11A-BFAD36C35AE4@goldelico.com>
In-Reply-To: <A88317FA-52CC-41D3-B11A-BFAD36C35AE4@goldelico.com>
From:   Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 08:46:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGngYiUPaR=_1NKZSjUQRK9+zUw3ztUpro7NV-O=sGAC2eOzUw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] SPI broken for SPI based panel drivers
To:     "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@goldelico.com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Discussions about the Letux Kernel 
        <letux-kernel@openphoenux.org>,
        Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 5:11 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> wrote:
>
> Anyways it is debatable if this is a bug at all. It is just a definition.

I respectfully disagree. Prior to the fix, your panel's active-low chip select
needed to be described in the devicetree with 'spi-cs-high'. That sounds
very much like a bug to me.

> Which is not well documented anywhere.

I agree that documentation can be improved here.
Would you like to submit a patch that improves:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml?h=v5.10-rc6#n28
?
This way, we also get Rob Herring involved, which may lead to more elegant
documentation. He is more likely to respond to a patch than to a question.

>
> What I especially wonder is why you fix that at all in drivers/spi/spi.c
> if polarity inversion is handled in gpiolib.

The reason for that is described in the commit message of
766c6b63aa04 ("spi: fix client driver breakages when using GPIO descriptors")