Hi Alan, On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 09:51:33AM -0400, Alan Ott wrote: > On 04/23/2014 09:11 AM, Varka Bhadram wrote: > >I followed the process that you mailed earlier, thnks for that. > > > >I am expecting the mail from Alan about the changes. > > Hi Varka, > > Is there a specific problem you're seeing? Typically in the kernel we expect > the SPI controller to succeed for a couple reasons: > 1. It's part of the basic, core functionality of a system. Checking for > errors on SPI transfers is analogous to making sure RAM you wrote actually > got written. > 2. Most of the time an SPI failure is not something we can detect anyway. > (disconnect one of the lines and see what you get). > 3. The code to check for it just adds a lot of bloat without much measurable > benefit. > > I've read the above in the comments in other drivers, but I can't remember > exactly where right now. There are plenty of examples in the kernel of SPI > being done this way, as it seems to be accepted practice in the kernel. > > If there is a specific issue that you're seeing, then let's talk about it, > otherwise I'm going to NAK this change. >
if somebody hasn't a right spi configuration the probe function should fail. Assumed that spi_sync will return a errno then. - Alex ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform _______________________________________________ Linux-zigbee-devel mailing list Linux-zigbee-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-zigbee-devel
