From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lukas Wunner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi: bcm2835: Allow platform to set realtime priority Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:43:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20170323134336.GA10576@h08.hostsharing.net> References: <1503363fcfb92adfa765d1c1c3e69fc673e72dde.1490264661.git.lukas@wunner.de> <20170323110718.sncw32gspvls75u7@sirena.org.uk> <20170323120257.GC20546@h08.hostsharing.net> <20170323122118.i2gc77debz4eu5hq@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-spi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Linus Walleij , Mathias Duckeck , linux-rpi-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Stephen Warren , Eric Anholt To: Mark Brown Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170323122118.i2gc77debz4eu5hq-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-spi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:21:18PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > Also, if you question setting the RT priority in the devicetree, why > > was that functionality allowed for pl022 in the first place? > > This was being done via platform data not via device tree, unlike > platform data device tree should provide a long term stable OS neutral > ABI. No, specifying it via the device tree was subsequently added with commit 39a6ac11df65 ("spi/pl022: Devicetree support w/o platform data"), sorry for not mentioning this in the commit message. There's already a bool in struct spi_master for this functionality and device tree support for pl022, so I don't quite understand why converting the bool to an int and adding device tree support for bcm2835 would be the wrong approach? Thanks, Lukas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html