On 05/11/2018 01:09 PM, Akash Gajjar wrote: > Hello Marek, > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.va...@gmail.com > <mailto:marek.va...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 05/11/2018 12:08 PM, Gajjar Akash wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > Thanks for the review comments. > > > > > -struct mxs_spi_slave { > > > - struct spi_slave slave; > > > - uint32_t max_khz; > > > - uint32_t mode; > > > - struct mxs_ssp_regs *regs; > > > +struct mxs_spi_priv { > > > + struct mxs_ssp_regs *regs; > > > + u32 max_khz; > > > + u32 mode; > > > + u32 bus; > > > + u32 cs; > > > > Type cleanup should be a separate patch > > > > > > Okay, I will prepare seperate patch for type cleanup. > > > > > > > }; > > > if (mxs_wait_mask_set(&ssp_regs->hw_ssp_ctrl0_reg, > > > SSP_CTRL0_RUN, MXS_SPI_MAX_TIMEOUT)) { > > > - printf("MXS SPI: Timeout waiting for > start\n"); > > > + debug("MXS SPI: Timeout waiting for > start\n"); > > > > printf , we don't want to hide errors > > > > > > okay, will revert it back to printf. > > > > > > > return -ETIMEDOUT; > > > } > > > > > + > > > +#ifndef __SPI_MXS_H > > > +#define __SPI_MXS_H > > > + > > > +struct mxs_spi_platdata { > > > + struct mxs_ssp_regs *regs; > > > + u32 bus; > > > + u32 max_hz; > > > + u32 cs; > > > > Why is this header here at all ? > > > > > > I didnt get this comment. do I need to place it somewhere else? > > See the beginning of this email, it seems the same structure exists > twice. > > > My intention was to have two individual structure for private and > platform data. > But now I could use one structre and access its members using two > structure variables(one for private and one for platadata). > > Is That looks okay?
I do not quite understand what you mean, but there is a duplication of information here. That's a problem and should be fixed. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
