[PATCH RFC] spi/omap: Trivial cleanup

[PATCH RFC] spi/omap: Trivial cleanup

[Shubhrajyoti D]

The context is stored directly inside drvdata structure post 
[f887876 spi/omap: Remove bus_num usage for instance index]. 
Remove the OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_CTRL macro as it is not needed anymore.

Cc: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
---
Applies on Benoit's for_3.4/dt_spi_eth

 drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c |    3 ---
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
index d1eb26c..3526281 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
@@ -45,9 +45,6 @@
 
 #define OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_FREQ		48000000
 
-/* OMAP2 has 3 SPI controllers, while OMAP3 has 4 */
-#define OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_CTRL 		4
-
 #define OMAP2_MCSPI_REVISION		0x00
 #define OMAP2_MCSPI_SYSSTATUS		0x14
 #define OMAP2_MCSPI_IRQSTATUS		0x18
-- 
1.7.1


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/

Re: [PATCH RFC] spi/omap: Trivial cleanup

[Cousson, Benoit]

Hi Shubhro,

On 2/29/2012 3:04 PM, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
> The context is stored directly inside drvdata structure post
> [f887876 spi/omap: Remove bus_num usage for instance index].
> Remove the OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_CTRL macro as it is not needed anymore.
>
> Cc: Benoit Cousson<b-cousson-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

Thanks for that extra cleanup, I missed it.

Acked-by: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

> ---
> Applies on Benoit's for_3.4/dt_spi_eth
>
>   drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c |    3 ---
>   1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
> index d1eb26c..3526281 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
> @@ -45,9 +45,6 @@
>
>   #define OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_FREQ		48000000
>
> -/* OMAP2 has 3 SPI controllers, while OMAP3 has 4 */
> -#define OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_CTRL 		4
> -

I guess it can be included in the "spi/omap: Remove bus_num usage for 
instance index"?
Is that OK for you?


Thanks,
Benoit


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d

Re: [PATCH RFC] spi/omap: Trivial cleanup

[Shubhrajyoti]

On Tuesday 06 March 2012 03:46 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> Hi Shubhro,
>
> On 2/29/2012 3:04 PM, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>> The context is stored directly inside drvdata structure post
>> [f887876 spi/omap: Remove bus_num usage for instance index].
>> Remove the OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_CTRL macro as it is not needed anymore.
>>
>> Cc: Benoit Cousson<b-cousson@ti.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti@ti.com>
>
> Thanks for that extra cleanup, I missed it.
>
> Acked-by: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
>
>> ---
>> Applies on Benoit's for_3.4/dt_spi_eth
>>
>>   drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c |    3 ---
>>   1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
>> b/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
>> index d1eb26c..3526281 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c
>> @@ -45,9 +45,6 @@
>>
>>   #define OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_FREQ        48000000
>>
>> -/* OMAP2 has 3 SPI controllers, while OMAP3 has 4 */
>> -#define OMAP2_MCSPI_MAX_CTRL         4
>> -
>
> I guess it can be included in the "spi/omap: Remove bus_num usage for
> instance index"?
> Is that OK for you?
Yes, sure.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Benoit
>