Hello,
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 02:16:11PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> - if (cpu_is_mx25() || cpu_is_mx31() || cpu_is_mx35()) {
>>> + /* i.MX51 has two eCSPI and one CSPI controllers, eCSPI controllers are
>>> + * not compatible with existing SPI controllers on other i.MX platforms,
>>> + * while CSPI controller is 100% compatible with the one on the i.MX35.
>>> + * We set the platform device id to 2 for this CSPI at i.MX51 board init
>>> + * level to distinguish it from two eCSPI controllers.
>>> + */
>>>
>> This comment is missing in Sascha's driver. I like it.
>> BTW, I'd like to make use of platform ids in this driver. This would
>> make this ugly "on imx51 id2 is a cspi" distinction unnecessary.
>>
>>
> agree, i like both your and lothar's solution.
> Either platform ids or flags in platform_data.
I suggest to do the cleanup later. Doing it before adding mx51 support
would make only more work for little benefit. And then the cleanup
bases on a working version. I'm willing to implement the platform id
thingy and evaluate it. But currently I have no time for that. So I
suggest we choose a mix between your and Sascha's patch for now and I
will check where the cleanup fits in my planning.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:
Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________
spi-devel-general mailing list
spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general
