On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:06:57AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:45:47PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:41:08PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > Something doesn't look right about PRP0001, what's the catch?
> > Microsoft decided not to
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:45:47PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:41:08PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:34:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> > > Theoretically you may declare your HID in the same / similar way as
> > > PRP0001 and use same
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:41:08PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:34:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Theoretically you may declare your HID in the same / similar way as
> > PRP0001 and use same compatible strings and all other DT properties
> > (when they make
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:56:49PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:36:15PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > FIFO size can be read from the property
> My personal preference is for the driver to hold the expert information
> about the hardware parameters, and not the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:34:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:37 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
>
> > Just noticed this now.
> > So for device tree, spi-fsl-dspi supports the following compatibles:
> >
>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:36:15PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:34 PM Andy Shevchenko
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:37 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
> >
> > > Just noticed this now.
> > > So
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:34 PM Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:37 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
>
> > Just noticed this now.
> > So for device tree, spi-fsl-dspi supports the following compatibles:
> >
> >
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:37 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
> Just noticed this now.
> So for device tree, spi-fsl-dspi supports the following compatibles:
>
> fsl,vf610-dspi
> fsl,ls1021a-v1.0-dspi
> fsl,ls1012a-dspi
>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:33:38PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 03:23:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > Showing my ignorance here, but is there something equivalent to
> > > of_machine_is_compatible()
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:30:44PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 06:02:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That's not something that it's particularly idiomatic to actually use in
> > ACPI and you end up with the same namespacing problem assigning IDs so
> > I'm not sure
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 05:47:44PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 03:23:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 02:47:58PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> > > > { "NXP0005",
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 06:02:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 07:09:50PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> > I don't even know if NXP0005 is made up or if it's written down
> > somewhere in the PNP ID registry. NXP0006 seems to be assigned to the
>
> Well, any ID is made
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 07:09:50PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> I don't even know if NXP0005 is made up or if it's written down
> somewhere in the PNP ID registry. NXP0006 seems to be assigned to the
Well, any ID is made up to some extent. I am concerned about the
allocation of IDs too, it
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 05:47:44PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 03:23:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 02:47:58PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > { "NXP0005", .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)_data[LS2085A], }
> > Based on some other stuff
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 08:43:20PM +0530, Kuldip Dwivedi wrote:
> Just a query, Can't we use meaningful HID for different SoC just like
> compatible strings in DT ?
> In this way Silicon parameters can also be added in
> fsl_dspi_devtype_data structure , which is already exist in driver
I don't
> -Original Message-
> From: Vladimir Oltean
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 8:18 PM
> To: Mark Brown
> Cc: Qiang Zhao ; kuldip dwivedi
> ; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org; Pankaj Bansal ; Varun
Sethi
> ; Tanveer Alam
> Subjec
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 03:23:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 02:47:58PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> > - The compatible string plays an integral part in the functionality of
> > the spi-fsl-dspi driver. I want to see a solution for ACPI where the
> > driver knows
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 02:47:58PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> - The compatible string plays an integral part in the functionality of
> the spi-fsl-dspi driver. I want to see a solution for ACPI where the
> driver knows on which SoC it's running on. Otherwise it doesn't know
> what are
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:10:49AM +, Qiang Zhao wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 23:21PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Yes, definitely bloatware from the old days. I think this driver needs the
> > existing
> > device tree bindings rethought a little bit before mindlessly porting them
> > to
ethi ; Tanveer
> Alam
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 07:37:25PM +0530, Kuldip Dwivedi wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Mark Brown
> > > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 7:37 PM
> >
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 08:19:41AM +, Qiang Zhao wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 19:25, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Yes, it's a legacy from bad board file conversions and shouldn't be used at
> > all.
> I saw a lot of driver assign spi_controller -> num_chipselect directly,
> should we do like
ethi
> ; Tanveer Alam
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 06:21:18PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 07:37:25PM +0530, Kuldip Dwivedi wrote:
>
> > > > The whole point with the device prope
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 06:21:18PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 07:37:25PM +0530, Kuldip Dwivedi wrote:
> > > The whole point with the device property API is that it works with
> > > both DT and ACPI without needing separate parsing, though in this
> > > case I'm
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
> Currently fsl DSPI driver has support of DT only. Adding ACPI
> support to the drive so that it can be used by UEFI firmware
> boot in ACPI mode. This driver will be probed if any firmware
> will expose HID "NXP0005" in DSDT table.
; > ; Pankaj Bansal ; Varun Sethi
> > ; tanveer
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
> >
> > > +static const struct acpi_device_id fsl_dspi_acpi_id
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Brown
> Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 7:37 PM
> To: kuldip dwivedi
> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Qiang Zhao
> ; Pankaj Bansal ; Varun Sethi
> ; tanveer
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fs
Hi kuldip,
Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on spi/for-next]
[also build test WARNING on v5.9-rc1 next-20200821]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 06:40:29PM +0530, kuldip dwivedi wrote:
> +static const struct acpi_device_id fsl_dspi_acpi_ids[] = {
> + { "NXP0005", .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)_data[LS2085A], },
> + {},
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, fsl_dspi_acpi_ids);
Does NXP know about this ID
28 matches
Mail list logo
