On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> This looks really good. In fact, can you think of any reason why we wouldn't
> force all spi drivers to use central queueing? I don't see any advantage
> in leaving the old mechanism in place other than to allow driver to transition
> from t
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Mark Brown
wrote:
>[Me]
>> + * This function checks if there is any spi message in the queue that
>> + * needs processing and delegate control to appropriate function
>> + * do_polling_transfer()/do_interrupt_dma_transfer()
>> + * based on the kind of the transfer
>
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Mark Brown
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 11:52:47AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
>
>> This looks really good. In fact, can you think of any reason why we wouldn't
>> force all spi drivers to use central queueing? I don't see any advantage
>> in leaving the old me
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 01:59:59PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij
>
> This rips the message queue in the PL022 driver out and pushes
> it into (optional) common infrastructure. Drivers that want to
> use the message pumping thread will need to select the symbol
> SPI_MASTER_QUE
From: Linus Walleij
This rips the message queue in the PL022 driver out and pushes
it into (optional) common infrastructure. Drivers that want to
use the message pumping thread will need to select the symbol
SPI_MASTER_QUEUE and implement three methods in place for the
current transfer() method.
