OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

virtio-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH] [PATCH v5] virtio-spi: add the device specification




On 11/29/2023 6:00 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 29-11-23, 16:54, Haixu Cui wrote:
On 11/29/2023 4:33 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Wed, Nov 29 2023, Haixu Cui <quic_haixcui@quicinc.com> wrote:
On 11/29/2023 3:30 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 28-11-23, 20:58, Haixu Cui wrote:
On 11/27/2023 6:17 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Hmm, I worked with a SPI controller over a decade ago, and I must be forgetting
something here I guess. But from whatever little I remember, with full-duplex
transfer, data flows on both MOSI and MISO lines as soon as clock signal is
applied.  And so amount of data sent is always be equal to amount of data
received by both sides.

Also if I see Linux's implementation of the `struct spi_transfer` [1], I see
`tx_buf`, `rx_buf` and a single `len` field, which applies to both the buffers.
Which I guess is indicating that both buffers are supposed to be of same length.

What am I missing ?

Oh so sorry for that. And I don't make it clear. Yes, tx_buf and rx_buf
have the same size, Linux has such restriction. Just as you mention,
kernel level spi_transfer has single "len", the same for
spi_ioc_transfer passed from the userland.

But I am not sure if this is in the scope of the spec. Because this is
ensured by Linux, but Virtio SPI driver won't also can't verify this.
This is a prerequisite for virtio spi processing requests.

I don't think this is a Linux only thing. This is how the SPI protocol is
designed to begin with. A clock is applied, data from FIFOs of both master and
slaves gets exchanged over the MOSI and MISO lines... And the length is _always_
the same. We are talking about the full-duplex mode of the hardware here and
this is how it works AFAICT.

So the spec should clearly point this out to avoid any mistakes. Or if you have
a usecase where you can have different lengths for tx and rx buffers, that I am
not aware of ?

Hi Viresh,

Thank you for your helpful comments. In next patch, I will clearly point this out:

"For full-duplex read and write transfer, both \field{tx_buf} and \field{rx_buf} are used and the buffer size of \field{tx_buf} must be same as \field{rx_buf}."

    And in drivernormative section, I will add a requirement:
"For full-duplex transfer, Virtio SPI driver MUST guarantee the write transfer size is equal to the read transfer size"

In fact, in my prototype, I only perform the transfers with same tx/rx length.

    Much appreciated.

Best Regards
Haixu Cui

What is your suggestion? How about adding some descriptions here, like
"for full-duplex, tx_buf and rx_buf are same in size, this is guaranteed
by the kernel"?

We must not really make any assumptions in the spec about concrete
implementations (here, the Linux kernel), as someone implementing it in
a different environment will need to make explicit choices.

I agree. I pointed this out since this is how the protocol works.

So, if tx_buf and rx_buf are required to be of the same size, it needs
to be explicitly stated in the spec, or an implementation might choose
to do it differently.

--
Viresh


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]