Hi Geert,
On Fri, 2025-05-02 at 13:13 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Commit cf9e4784f3bde3e4 ("spi: sh-msiof: Add slave mode support") added
> a new mode member to the sh_msiof_spi_info structure, but did not update
> any board files. Hence all users in board files rely on the default
> being host mode.
>
> Make this unambiguous by configuring host mode explicitly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c b/arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c
> index 6f13557eecd6bb21..a641e26f8fdf7369 100644
> --- a/arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c
> @@ -825,6 +825,7 @@ static struct spi_board_info spi_bus[] = {
> /* MSIOF0 */
> static struct sh_msiof_spi_info msiof0_data = {
> .num_chipselect = 1,
> + .mode = MSIOF_SPI_HOST,
> };
>
> static struct resource msiof0_resources[] = {
Is MSIOF_SPI_HOST actually the correct identifier?
I'm asking because the commit above lists only MISOF_SPI_MASTER and _SLAVE:
enum {
MSIOF_SPI_MASTER,
MSIOF_SPI_SLAVE,
};
Unless the identifiers were renamed a few years later to avoid political issues.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer
`. `' Physicist
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
