Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:43:42 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To:     Ben Wolsieffer <ben.wolsieffer@hefring.com>
Cc:     linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
        Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@foss.st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: stm32: enable controller before asserting CS
Message-ID: <9aa5e049-bd1c-41a6-b9b8-037ebb4f54b8@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20231201214014.2539031-1-ben.wolsieffer@hefring.com>
 <b070eb2a-05d7-4e6a-8de9-15179045d192@sirena.org.uk>
 <ZWpoKEcM0ZeYAsBa@dell-precision-5540>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Kx4ZGGc8DcXvnXpO"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZWpoKEcM0ZeYAsBa@dell-precision-5540>
Precedence: bulk


--Kx4ZGGc8DcXvnXpO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 06:11:36PM -0500, Ben Wolsieffer wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 09:50:33PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 04:40:14PM -0500, Ben Wolsieffer wrote:

> > This feels like it'd be a good fit for moving to runtime PM - that way
> > we avoid bouncing the controller on and off between messages which is
> > probably better anyway.  The driver already does pinctrl management for
> > the device there.

> Yes, that probably makes sense. There are a few bits that can only be
> configured while the controller is disabled, but it doesn't look like
> that applies to any of the ones set in stm32_spi_prepare_msg().

> I'm a little hesitant to make big changes to the driver since I can only
> test them on an STM32F7 though.

It doesn't seem much more complex than what you're already proposing.

> > It also occurs to me that this isn't going to work for devices which
> > chip select inverted - for them we can't stop driving chip select at all
> > since they need it held high when idle.  There aren't that many such
> > devices and it'd loose us the PM which is rather awkward...  I guess
> > that's an incremental issue with a more invasive fix though.

> The driver only supports GPIO chip select rather than native, so I don't
> think this is a problem. Also, I don't think there's any difference

So mentioning the drive seems a bit confusing then?

> between inverted or uninverted here. They both either need to be driven
> all the time or have pull-up/downs.

It's a lot more likely you'll get away with things one way or another
for a missing pull down.

--Kx4ZGGc8DcXvnXpO
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

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

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmVtyX0ACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9BmiQf+J4Fy0f2hi8No7l8CL6UF+VDBZtZND51px92ygeK4jYzoFztbrY/KuUuq
axMfX0zqqhPqrkNTIhWSxhE+cyaoLIvbMdXMUDlmDfVpD4OUFMrSCKmAfg/jw3Jp
o0bCBIhnA2OPfza6nU6AlYbxFkDkmZvsze/qBfwSrVJzEFQ0z1CZyzS08PyDehkZ
GikHVyFqpL/ZiwvuJbypJQASg+RhI9pSBssKOpFOJQJtF8ATewbENIh//Ix1PY91
NI747pcM5AlJWU4YLDlPn1uu0f/MNxevfxCblUN5kaJJgy8QtC3TfeBEhCl4Wg6g
aRJcubes95kDlvJH0ffvtJnBc04oPw==
=SHJo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Kx4ZGGc8DcXvnXpO--