On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 05:19:54PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 26 June 2016 at 14:57, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That would be a binding for the connector which is the big missing bit
> > here - it's not clear that such a limited connector description would be
> > a good idea.
> It would work
On 26 June 2016 at 14:57, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 02:53:31PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 26 June 2016 at 14:45, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > No, there's other things like figuring out which controller to bind to
>> > that need to be taken into consideration.
>
>> Why do yo
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 02:53:31PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 26 June 2016 at 14:45, Mark Brown wrote:
> > No, there's other things like figuring out which controller to bind to
> > that need to be taken into consideration.
> Why do you care? So long as you name the CS that is available
On 26 June 2016 at 14:45, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 02:39:20PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 26 June 2016 at 13:58, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > No, there's a lot more to having overlays to board-neutral connectors...
>
>> If you are fine with using only the SPI pins then this
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 02:39:20PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 26 June 2016 at 13:58, Mark Brown wrote:
> > No, there's a lot more to having overlays to board-neutral connectors...
> If you are fine with using only the SPI pins then this is all it takes.
No, there's other things like fig
On 26 June 2016 at 13:58, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 01:35:46PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 26 June 2016 at 13:21, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > You can just add the entire slave node in the overlay, it's not clear
>> > that this buys us anything useful
>
>> You have to target
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 01:35:46PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 26 June 2016 at 13:21, Mark Brown wrote:
> > You can just add the entire slave node in the overlay, it's not clear
> > that this buys us anything useful
> You have to target the master node and specify the CS in the overlay
>
On 26 June 2016 at 13:21, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 04:23:41AM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 26 June 2016 at 03:15, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > I can't relate this hunk to the changelog and there's a coding style
>> > problem, if there's { } on one side of an if statement it
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 04:23:41AM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 26 June 2016 at 03:15, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I can't relate this hunk to the changelog and there's a coding style
> > problem, if there's { } on one side of an if statement it should be on
> > both sides. Why are we making thi
On 26 June 2016 at 03:15, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 05:41:20PM -, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> SPI slave devices are not created when looking up driver for the slave
>> fails. Create a device anyway so it can be manually bound to a driver.
>
>> @@ -1543,11 +1542,10 @@ of_registe
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 05:41:20PM -, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> SPI slave devices are not created when looking up driver for the slave
> fails. Create a device anyway so it can be manually bound to a driver.
> @@ -1543,11 +1542,10 @@ of_register_spi_device(struct spi_master *master,
> struct d
SPI slave devices are not created when looking up driver for the slave
fails. Create a device anyway so it can be manually bound to a driver.
Signed-off-by: Michal Suchanek
---
drivers/spi/spi.c | 10 --
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/dr
12 matches
Mail list logo
