On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 06:35:35PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 November 2013 06:31 PM, Mark Brown wrote:

> >Is this really generic enough to put here rather than in the driver
> >data?

> The thought behind this was that if a master controller supports
> memory mapped operation and slave wants to use memcpy in his
> driver(bypassing spi ), then we should have a mean to communicate
> between the
> master and the slave. So, 'spi_master' seems to be the place for me
> for this data,
> which could be parsed in the slave side also.

I would have expected that the address would be returned by the function
that maps the buffer in rather than stored permanently in the master.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to