Online shopping for brand names at discounted prices
http://www.fineandchic.com/?wm=14793tr=8038
--
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first --
Online shopping for brand names at discounted prices
http://www.fineandchic.com/?wm=14793tr=8038
--
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first --
2010/7/19 David Brownell davi...@pacbell.net:
A dedicated loopback test is the wrong model,
given that SPI_LOOP exists. And is even used
in the sample userspace code ...
Yeah I see, I never quite understood how SPI_LOOP
was intended really.
From there to writing a *generic* loopback test is
2010/7/19 David Brownell davi...@pacbell.net:
A dedicated loopback test is the wrong model,
given that SPI_LOOP exists. And is even used
in the sample userspace code ...
Hm looking over and grepping everywhere about this gives
me no clues as to how an in-kernel SPI loopback test could
use
No matter how much I look at it, it seems like
all use of this require you to first register
*some* device,
OBVIOUSLY. You can't use SPI without a device;
it's like any other driver framework in Linux.
What else should you expect???
Look at the sample code though, ISTR you'll see
that when
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Cory Maccarrone darkstar6...@gmail.com wrote:
This change fixes 8-bit transfers and RX-only transfers. The
SPI100k framework requires minimum 16-bit words to be written, so 8-bit
transfers must be shited by 8 bits and sent out as a 16-bit word.
Additionally,
