From: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] spi: add STM32F7 QSPI controller driver
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 13:41:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <72a9de59-613c-4c73-9bbd-b10df44d6f55@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z-usVI_cB6bgsiRy@pengutronix.de>
Hello Oleksij,
On 4/1/25 11:05, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 10:53:44AM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>> Hello Oleksij,
>>
>> On 3/31/25 14:29, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
>>> From: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
>>>
>>> Introduce support for the STM32F7 QSPI controller, compatible with
>>> "st,stm32f469-qspi".
>>>
>>> Validated on STM32MP133-based MECT1S r1 board, which includes an
>>> F7-compatible QSPI peripheral
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
>>> ---
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> +static int stm32_qspi_get_mode(u8 buswidth)
>>
>> Is this ever called with a buswidth > 1? I think the spi_mem core in
>> barebox never uses higher buswidths. Given that you are adding QSPI
>> support, you will surely want to see quad buswidth actually working,
>> right? :D
>
> Sure :) I get it - every maintainer dreams of getting the most out of
> each patch, and full QSPI support with quad buswidth would definitely be
> nice to have.
>
> But with this patch, we're going from “doesn't work at all” to “works,
> just not at full speed yet.” That’s already a big step forward,
> especially for bring-up and flashing use cases.
I agree that it's a considerable improvement. Thanks for putting time
into making it work.
> If we judged everything in Barebox by full performance, we’d probably
> have to drop most of the networking drivers too - since Barebox usually
> isn’t about maxing out throughput anyway ;)
Let's get TCP merged before going there. :D
> So yes, proper quad support would be great - but for now, this patch
> gets us something working, and that’s a solid starting point.
The thing is there are a number of QSPI drivers already and there's
still no exercising of higher buswidths. I don't have any projects
currently that use SPI-NOR with a higher bus width, so the only thing I
can do is raise some awareness of the limitation. ;)
Cheers,
Ahmad
>
> Best Regards,
> Oleksij
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-01 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-31 12:29 Oleksij Rempel
2025-04-01 8:07 ` Sascha Hauer
2025-04-01 8:21 ` Oleksij Rempel
2025-04-01 8:53 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-04-01 9:05 ` Oleksij Rempel
2025-04-01 11:41 ` Ahmad Fatoum [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=72a9de59-613c-4c73-9bbd-b10df44d6f55@pengutronix.de \
--to=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox