On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Mark Brown
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 05:15:26PM +0530, Girish KS wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Mark Brown
>
>> > Two options here, one is to just assume nobody will use GPIO 0 and the
>> > other is to set the number appopriately during probe so th
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Girish KS wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Mark Brown
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 03:21:03PM +0530, Girish KS wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Mark Brown
>>
>>> > It's also a bit odd that we end up checking cs_gpio and then using line
>>>
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Mark Brown
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 03:21:03PM +0530, Girish KS wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Mark Brown
>
>> > It's also a bit odd that we end up checking cs_gpio and then using line
>> > in the code, it'd be more idiomatic if cs_gpio were the G
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Mark Brown
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:13:33PM +0530, Girish K S wrote:
>> From: Girish K S
>>
>> The existing driver supports gpio based /cs signal.
>> For controller's that have one device per controller,
>> the slave device's /cs signal might be internal
From: Girish K S
The existing driver supports gpio based /cs signal.
For controller's that have one device per controller,
the slave device's /cs signal might be internally controlled
by the chip select bit of slave select register. They are not
externally asserted/deasserted using gpio pin.
Thi
