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, 30 Sep 2021 13:46:30 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To:     Dafna Hirschfeld <dafna.hirschfeld@collabora.com>
Cc:     kernel@collabora.com, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
        enric.balletbo@collabora.com, dafna3@gmail.com,
        Mason Zhang <Mason.Zhang@mediatek.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, wsd_upstream@mediatek.com,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "spi: modify set_cs_timing parameter"
Message-ID: <20210930124630.GY4199@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20210930120700.2564-1-dafna.hirschfeld@collabora.com>
 <20210930122513.GX4199@sirena.org.uk>
 <28f8af42-4535-ef9f-e521-712d37e2cb72@collabora.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sKosZo66cxuwvnFI"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <28f8af42-4535-ef9f-e521-712d37e2cb72@collabora.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk


--sKosZo66cxuwvnFI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 02:36:01PM +0200, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:
> hi, thanks for the fast feedback
>=20
> On 30.09.21 14:25, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 02:07:00PM +0200, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:
> > > This reverts commit 04e6bb0d6bb127bac929fb35edd2dd01613c9520.

> > Which is not what the commit message nor the paste of the full hash
> > claimed :/

> What is the paste of the full hash?

The above.

> Since the second commit is only a warning fixes I thought it is cumbersom=
e to
> send two separate reverting patches. Should I?

No, you should write a proper commit log with (like I said) a normal
subject line - basically, follow the process in submitting-patches.rst.

> > Do we have any analysis as to why?  Do these devices use timing
> > parameters in some way for example, or do the values written out to the
> > device change in some way?

> > You've provided no analysis here so it's hard to tell if this is just
> > some random change that happens to change code generation slighly or if
> > there's some actual reason why this might fix something.  I'll note that
> > as far as I can see there are no users of this API upstream so I'm
> > guessing that you've got some out of tree consumer driver which uses the
> > API, it's possible that there was some error in updating that driver to
> > the new interface which is causing the issue.

> Actually the original commit not only change that callback 'set_cs_timing=
' but it also
> calls 'mtk_spi_set_hw_cs_timing' directly from the function "mtk_spi_prep=
are_message".
> So this actually influences all devices bound to this driver (in upstream)
> I did some printing and it does change values that are written to registe=
rs.

OK, so that's something that should have been in the commit log,
preferrably in a more detailed form that identifies what the change is.
However changing the values written out is clearly not the intent of the
patch and it is a substantially better API so can we not just fix things
so that the old values are written out?  Why are we jumping straight to
a revert here?

--sKosZo66cxuwvnFI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

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

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmFVsaUACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9Bwtwf+MtvgKYtUudf/n47UjD7LDb/EwrRnWOQ95GC+BenNNQM1lBYriL17NgP0
O9aGoqvc7JWUI698KrgSrsxHBSkDs0r8+tZQxZeEcbR5kUkOsoV0s98AlMjN2sHP
LoZwtgN4j/2R6e70+Wc4NU0fv1E0dlbkgg0GKEvtxxsGgGkvxvDMPJg6SEOqpKwF
gXowiuCHiI1TzZercbs5OCSSk9++MgiNOxNCNjMkWynYISicZB+LMbypkip7fGGZ
fGPA9av8KaB7UVCG6L34ink0d4gMWXmjrmCAB7JeX+KtkhLU4ASbNkjIc1eaQU85
kUoFycW/L766FtrdLQTy4+YScGyN/A==
=AH+t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--sKosZo66cxuwvnFI--