From fc129a43aa2705770dc45b2e9c506d2617fd5863 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Douglas Anderson Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:07:59 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] spi: spi-geni-qcom: Use the FIFO even more In commit 902481a78ee4 ("spi: spi-geni-qcom: Actually use our FIFO") I explained that the maximum size we could program the FIFO was "mas->tx_fifo_depth - 3" but that I chose "mas->tx_fifo_depth()" because I was worried about decreased bandwidth. Since that time: * All the interconnect patches have landed, making things run at the proper speed. * I've done more measurements. This lets me confirm that there's really no downside of using the FIFO more. Specifically I did "flashrom -p ec -r /tmp/foo.bin" on a Chromebook and averaged over several runs. Before: It took 6.66 seconds and 59669 interrupts fired. After: It took 6.66 seconds and 47992 interrupts fired. Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200912140730.1.Ie67fa32009b94702d56232c064f1d89065ee8836@changeid Signed-off-by: Mark Brown --- drivers/spi/spi-geni-qcom.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-geni-qcom.c b/drivers/spi/spi-geni-qcom.c index 0dc3f4c55b0ba..7f0bf0dec466e 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/spi-geni-qcom.c +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-geni-qcom.c @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ static int spi_geni_init(struct spi_geni_master *mas) * Hardware programming guide suggests to configure * RX FIFO RFR level to fifo_depth-2. */ - geni_se_init(se, mas->tx_fifo_depth / 2, mas->tx_fifo_depth - 2); + geni_se_init(se, mas->tx_fifo_depth - 3, mas->tx_fifo_depth - 2); /* Transmit an entire FIFO worth of data per IRQ */ mas->tx_wm = 1; ver = geni_se_get_qup_hw_version(se); -- 2.39.5