[PATCH linux dev-5.8 v2 09/11] spi: npcm-pspi: Add full duplex support
Joel Stanley
joel at jms.id.au
Mon Jan 11 12:04:27 AEDT 2021
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 13:45, Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Modify the IRQ handler in the NPCM PSPI
> driver to support SPI full duplex communication.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77 at gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/spi/spi-npcm-pspi.c | 75 +++++++++++++++----------------------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-npcm-pspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-npcm-pspi.c
> index 87cd0233c60b..92fae0b23eb1 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-npcm-pspi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-npcm-pspi.c
> @@ -197,22 +197,22 @@ static void npcm_pspi_setup_transfer(struct spi_device *spi,
> static void npcm_pspi_send(struct npcm_pspi *priv)
> {
> int wsize;
> - u16 val;
> + u16 val = 0;
>
> wsize = min(bytes_per_word(priv->bits_per_word), priv->tx_bytes);
> priv->tx_bytes -= wsize;
>
> - if (!priv->tx_buf)
> - return;
It looks like you're removing this check and instead doing it inside
each case. That seems like a waste, why not leave the single check in?
> -
> switch (wsize) {
> case 1:
> - val = *priv->tx_buf++;
> + if (priv->tx_buf)
> + val = *priv->tx_buf++;
> iowrite8(val, NPCM_PSPI_DATA + priv->base);
> break;
> case 2:
> - val = *priv->tx_buf++;
> - val = *priv->tx_buf++ | (val << 8);
> + if (priv->tx_buf) {
> + val = *priv->tx_buf++;
> + val = *priv->tx_buf++ | (val << 8);
> + }
> iowrite16(val, NPCM_PSPI_DATA + priv->base);
> break;
> default:
> @@ -224,22 +224,24 @@ static void npcm_pspi_send(struct npcm_pspi *priv)
> static void npcm_pspi_recv(struct npcm_pspi *priv)
> {
> int rsize;
> - u16 val;
> + u16 val_16;
> + u8 val_8;
>
> rsize = min(bytes_per_word(priv->bits_per_word), priv->rx_bytes);
> priv->rx_bytes -= rsize;
>
> - if (!priv->rx_buf)
> - return;
> -
> switch (rsize) {
> case 1:
> - *priv->rx_buf++ = ioread8(priv->base + NPCM_PSPI_DATA);
> + val_8 = ioread8(priv->base + NPCM_PSPI_DATA);
> + if (priv->rx_buf)
> + *priv->rx_buf++ = val_8;
> break;
> case 2:
> - val = ioread16(priv->base + NPCM_PSPI_DATA);
> - *priv->rx_buf++ = (val >> 8);
> - *priv->rx_buf++ = val & 0xff;
> + val_16 = ioread16(priv->base + NPCM_PSPI_DATA);
> + if (priv->rx_buf) {
> + *priv->rx_buf++ = (val_16 >> 8);
> + *priv->rx_buf++ = val_16 & 0xff;
> + }
> break;
> default:
> WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> @@ -298,43 +300,26 @@ static irqreturn_t npcm_pspi_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> struct npcm_pspi *priv = dev_id;
> u8 stat;
>
> - stat = ioread8(priv->base + NPCM_PSPI_STAT);
> -
> if (!priv->tx_buf && !priv->rx_buf)
> return IRQ_NONE;
>
> - if (priv->tx_buf) {
> - if (stat & NPCM_PSPI_STAT_RBF) {
> - ioread8(NPCM_PSPI_DATA + priv->base);
> - if (priv->tx_bytes == 0) {
> - npcm_pspi_disable(priv);
> - complete(&priv->xfer_done);
> - return IRQ_HANDLED;
> - }
> - }
> -
> - if ((stat & NPCM_PSPI_STAT_BSY) == 0)
> - if (priv->tx_bytes)
> - npcm_pspi_send(priv);
> + if (priv->tx_bytes == 0 && priv->rx_bytes == 0) {
> + npcm_pspi_disable(priv);
> + complete(&priv->xfer_done);
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> - if (priv->rx_buf) {
> - if (stat & NPCM_PSPI_STAT_RBF) {
> - if (!priv->rx_bytes)
> - return IRQ_NONE;
> -
> - npcm_pspi_recv(priv);
> + stat = ioread8(priv->base + NPCM_PSPI_STAT);
>
> - if (!priv->rx_bytes) {
> - npcm_pspi_disable(priv);
> - complete(&priv->xfer_done);
> - return IRQ_HANDLED;
> - }
> - }
> + /*
> + * first we do the read since if we do the write we previous read might
> + * be lost (indeed low chances)
> + */
> + if ((stat & NPCM_PSPI_STAT_RBF) && priv->rx_bytes)
> + npcm_pspi_recv(priv);
>
> - if (((stat & NPCM_PSPI_STAT_BSY) == 0) && !priv->tx_buf)
> - iowrite8(0x0, NPCM_PSPI_DATA + priv->base);
> - }
> + if (((stat & NPCM_PSPI_STAT_BSY) == 0) && priv->tx_bytes)
> + npcm_pspi_send(priv);
>
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
> --
> 2.22.0
>
More information about the openbmc
mailing list