[spi-devel-general] [PATCH v4] xilinx_spi: Splitted into generic, of and platform driver, added support for DS570

[Grant Likely]

Oops, I replied to the original version, but missed the subsequent
versions.  Looks like some of my comments still apply though.
Overall, the patch changes too many things all at once.  You should
look at splitting it up.  At the very least the io accessor changes
should be done in a separate patch.

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Richard Röjfors
<richard.rojfors at mocean-labs.com> wrote:
> @@ -227,6 +227,21 @@ config SPI_XILINX
>          See the "OPB Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) (v1.00e)"
>          Product Specification document (DS464) for hardware details.
>
> +         Or for the DS570, see "XPS Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) (v2.00b)"
> +
> +config SPI_XILINX_OF
> +       tristate "Xilinx SPI controller OF device"
> +       depends on SPI_XILINX && XILINX_VIRTEX
> +       help
> +         This is the OF driver for the SPI controller IP from the Xilinx EDK.
> +
> +config SPI_XILINX_PLTFM
> +       tristate "Xilinx SPI controller platform device"
> +       depends on SPI_XILINX
> +       help
> +         This is the platform driver for the SPI controller IP
> +         from the Xilinx EDK.
> +

Personally, I don't think it is necessary to present these options to
the user.  I think they can be auto-selected depending on CONFIG_OF
and CONFIG_PLATFORM.

> +struct xilinx_spi {
> +       /* bitbang has to be first */
> +       struct spi_bitbang bitbang;
> +       struct completion done;
> +       struct resource mem; /* phys mem */
> +       void __iomem    *regs;  /* virt. address of the control registers */
> +       u32 irq;
> +       u8 *rx_ptr;             /* pointer in the Tx buffer */
> +       const u8 *tx_ptr;       /* pointer in the Rx buffer */
> +       int remaining_bytes;    /* the number of bytes left to transfer */
> +       /* offset to the XSPI regs, these might vary... */
> +       u8 bits_per_word;
> +       bool big_endian;        /* The device could be accessed big or little
> +                                * endian
> +                                */
> +};
> +

Why is the definition of xilinx_spi moved?

>  /* Register definitions as per "OPB Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) (v1.00e)
>  * Product Specification", DS464
>  */
> -#define XSPI_CR_OFFSET         0x62    /* 16-bit Control Register */
> +#define XSPI_CR_OFFSET         0x60    /* Control Register */
>
>  #define XSPI_CR_ENABLE         0x02
>  #define XSPI_CR_MASTER_MODE    0x04
> @@ -40,8 +53,9 @@
>  #define XSPI_CR_RXFIFO_RESET   0x40
>  #define XSPI_CR_MANUAL_SSELECT 0x80
>  #define XSPI_CR_TRANS_INHIBIT  0x100
> +#define XSPI_CR_LSB_FIRST      0x200
>
> -#define XSPI_SR_OFFSET         0x67    /* 8-bit Status Register */
> +#define XSPI_SR_OFFSET         0x64    /* Status Register */
>
>  #define XSPI_SR_RX_EMPTY_MASK  0x01    /* Receive FIFO is empty */
>  #define XSPI_SR_RX_FULL_MASK   0x02    /* Receive FIFO is full */
> @@ -49,8 +63,8 @@
>  #define XSPI_SR_TX_FULL_MASK   0x08    /* Transmit FIFO is full */
>  #define XSPI_SR_MODE_FAULT_MASK        0x10    /* Mode fault error */
>
> -#define XSPI_TXD_OFFSET                0x6b    /* 8-bit Data Transmit Register */
> -#define XSPI_RXD_OFFSET                0x6f    /* 8-bit Data Receive Register */
> +#define XSPI_TXD_OFFSET                0x68    /* Data Transmit Register */
> +#define XSPI_RXD_OFFSET                0x6C    /* Data Receive Register */
>
>  #define XSPI_SSR_OFFSET                0x70    /* 32-bit Slave Select Register */
>
> @@ -70,43 +84,72 @@
>  #define XSPI_INTR_TX_UNDERRUN          0x08    /* TxFIFO was underrun */
>  #define XSPI_INTR_RX_FULL              0x10    /* RxFIFO is full */
>  #define XSPI_INTR_RX_OVERRUN           0x20    /* RxFIFO was overrun */
> +#define XSPI_INTR_TX_HALF_EMPTY                0x40    /* TxFIFO is half empty */
>
>  #define XIPIF_V123B_RESETR_OFFSET      0x40    /* IPIF reset register */
>  #define XIPIF_V123B_RESET_MASK         0x0a    /* the value to write */
>
> -struct xilinx_spi {
> -       /* bitbang has to be first */
> -       struct spi_bitbang bitbang;
> -       struct completion done;
> +/* to follow are some functions that does little of big endian read and
> + * write depending on the config of the device.
> + */
> +static inline void xspi_write8(struct xilinx_spi *xspi, u32 offs, u8 val)
> +{
> +       iowrite8(val, xspi->regs + offs + ((xspi->big_endian) ? 3 : 0));
> +}
>
> -       void __iomem    *regs;  /* virt. address of the control registers */
> +static inline void xspi_write16(struct xilinx_spi *xspi, u32 offs, u16 val)
> +{
> +       if (xspi->big_endian)
> +               iowrite16be(val, xspi->regs + offs + 2);
> +       else
> +               iowrite16(val, xspi->regs + offs);
> +}
>
> -       u32             irq;
> +static inline void xspi_write32(struct xilinx_spi *xspi, u32 offs, u32 val)
> +{
> +       if (xspi->big_endian)
> +               iowrite32be(val, xspi->regs + offs);
> +       else
> +               iowrite32(val, xspi->regs + offs);
> +}
>
> -       u32             speed_hz; /* SCK has a fixed frequency of speed_hz Hz */
> +static inline u8 xspi_read8(struct xilinx_spi *xspi, u32 offs)
> +{
> +       return ioread8(xspi->regs + offs + ((xspi->big_endian) ? 3 : 0));
> +}
>
> -       u8 *rx_ptr;             /* pointer in the Tx buffer */
> -       const u8 *tx_ptr;       /* pointer in the Rx buffer */
> -       int remaining_bytes;    /* the number of bytes left to transfer */
> -};
> +static inline u16 xspi_read16(struct xilinx_spi *xspi, u32 offs)
> +{
> +       if (xspi->big_endian)
> +               return ioread16be(xspi->regs + offs + 2);
> +       else
> +               return ioread16(xspi->regs + offs);
> +}
> +
> +static inline u32 xspi_read32(struct xilinx_spi *xspi, u32 offs)
> +{
> +       if (xspi->big_endian)
> +               return ioread32be(xspi->regs + offs);
> +       else
> +               return ioread32(xspi->regs + offs);
> +}

Ah, you changed these to functions instead of macros.  I like.
However, as you suggested elsewhere in this thread, you could change
these to callbacks and then eliminate the if/else statements.  I think
that is the approach you should use.  I don't think you need to worry
about it being slower.  Any extra cycles for jumping to a callback
will be far dwarfed by the number of cycles it takes to complete an
SPI transfer.

g.


-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.