On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 14:37 -0400, Matt Porter wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 08:42:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > 
> > Can't we come up with a version of dma_request_slave_channel that works
> > both ways for now:
> > 
> >     mcspi_dma->dma_rx =
> >             dma_request_slave_channel_compat(mask, omap_dma_filter_fn, &sig,
> >                                     &master->dev, 
> > mcspi_dma->dma_rx_ch_name);
> >     ...                     
> > 
> > Then it's just question of patching away two lines later on rather than
> > having to add all this if else to all the drivers first, then patching
> > it away again.
> 
> I think that something like that is workable with the implementation
> simply checking for of_node to do the right thing.
Yes, I think it would be better to have common API but underneath two
implementations in transitional phase.



-- 
~Vinod


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;258768047;13503038;j?
http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html
_______________________________________________
spi-devel-general mailing list
spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general

Reply via email to