From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dv@vollmann.ch (Detlef Vollmann) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 18:44:45 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 4/7] at91: remove non used at91_spi.h In-Reply-To: <20110715154636.GA20678@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <1310687525-22486-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> <1310687525-22486-4-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> <4E2028E1.1060603@vollmann.ch> <20110715154636.GA20678@game.jcrosoft.org> Message-ID: <4E206E7D.2070708@vollmann.ch> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/15/11 17:46, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 13:47 Fri 15 Jul , Detlef Vollmann wrote: >> Sorry, I couldn't find a summary message for this patch series, >> so I picked this one to reply, because this one hurts me most. >> >> On 07/15/11 01:52, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD >>> Cc: Nicolas Ferre >>> --- >>> arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h | 81 >> ---------------------------- >>> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-) >>> delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h >> [...] >> >> First, I'm actually using mach/at91_spi.h in an SPI slave driver. >> And I'm using arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h instead of >> drivers/spi/atmel_spi.h (which still exists in the kernel version >> we use here), because arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h >> is accessible from an out-of-tree driver w/o extra effort. >> >> And this applies to all all of those header files, so I'm >> really against all patches in this series. > You need the use SPI framework for this I think you reply here to the wrong part of my message. This part here is about the whole patch series, as I didn't get a summary message for the patch series. About the SPI driver: From Documentation/spi/spi-summary: "At this writing, Linux has no slave side programming interface." So there's no SPI framwork that covers the slave side. > Out of tree driver is not enough good reason to keep it As there's currently no slave support in-tree, any Linux device that's an SPI slave needs an out-of-tree driver. And again, there's no rationale given for moving all the other headers from an genarally accessible place to a generally inaccessible place, so I'm still against the whole patch series. Regards, Detlef