mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 |




      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