From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Mack Subject: Re: [PATCH resend 1/2] SPI: spi-gpio: store chipselect information in private structure Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:15:43 +0200 Message-ID: <501E9C2F.808@gmail.com> References: <1343854638-32563-1-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com> <20120804111220.GG10523@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: spi-devel-general-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Linus Walleij To: Mark Brown Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120804111220.GG10523-yzvPICuk2AATkU/dhu1WVueM+bqZidxxQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: spi-devel-general-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org On 04.08.2012 13:12, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 10:57:17PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: >> The spi-gpio driver currently assumes the chipselect gpio number is >> stored in ->controller_data of the device's static board information. > > Applied both, thanks. It's a bit sad that we need an explict property > for num-chipselects though. > We don't need that, and a patch to change it would be trivial. IIRC, there was just no agreement on deriving that information implicitly via the count of given GPIOs, and I don't know what should be considered more important - resemblance between drivers bindings or simplicity. We could of course change that for all SPI master drivers at once. Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/