From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kevin McNeely" Subject: RE: [v4 3/3] 3/3 spi: Cypress TTSP G3 SPI Device Driver Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:14:27 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1294188847-24728-3-git-send-email-kev@cypress.com> <20110112184550.GB9168@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D38182B.60803@codeaurora.org> <20110121092739.GB24214@core.coreip.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dmitry Torokhov , Trilok Soni Cc: David Brown , Samuel Ortiz , Eric Miao , Mike Frysinger , Henrik Rydberg , Alan Cox , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Hi Dmitry, Thank you for the update. I will begin work on the protocol B and cleanup according to your findings. I appreciate your comments. Best regards, Kevin > -----Original Message----- > From: Dmitry Torokhov [mailto:dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 1:28 AM > To: Trilok Soni > Cc: Kevin McNeely; David Brown; Samuel Ortiz; Eric Miao; Mike > Frysinger; Henrik Rydberg; Alan Cox; linux-input@vger.kernel.org; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [v4 3/3] 3/3 spi: Cypress TTSP G3 SPI Device Driver > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 04:40:35PM +0530, Trilok Soni wrote: > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > On 1/13/2011 12:32 AM, Kevin McNeely wrote: > > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > > > Thank you for your review. > > > > > > Will the existing patches get into the current merge? > > > > > > Can I revisit this discussion as part of our plan to provide a > Protocol > > > B driver? > > > > > > Thanks and best regards, > > > Kevin > > > > > > > Any updates on Kevin's question here? > > > > Hi Trilok, Kevin, > > Ah, sorry, was not feeling well last week and lost track of this > driver. > > No, I am sorry, bit the driver is not quite ready to be merged. Aside > of > SPI abort/timeout issues we also have cyttsp_close() implementation > busted (once you close device you lose irq) and bunch of other things I > need to look over. I also have concern about having protocol A now and > upgrading to protocol B: clients that only understand protocol A will > get broken at A->B transition. I think we should consider implementing > B > right away for mainline (no, I do not want A/B config options). > > Sorry for being slow with doing full review... > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry --------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any attachments may contain Cypress (or its subsidiaries) confidential information. If it has been received in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this message. ---------------------------------------------------------------