Hi Sandeep
I had another look at your code and am wondering about the correctness
of more comments, and I wonder about error handling in the ISR:
2009/9/1 s-paul...@ti.com:
From: Sandeep Paulraj s-paul...@ti.com
+ * davinci_spi_bufs - functions which will handle transfer data
+ * @spi: spi
-Original Message-
From: coocoo.chan...@googlemail.com [mailto:coocoo.chan...@googlemail.com]
On Behalf Of siegbert.ba...@gmx.de
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 10:25 AM
To: Paulraj, Sandeep
Cc: davinci-linux-open-sou...@linux.davincidsp.com;
dbrown...@users.sourceforge.net;
Hi Sandeep.
Paulraj, Sandeep schrieb:
On Behalf Of siegbert.ba...@gmx.de
I had another look at your code and am wondering about the correctness
of more comments, and I wonder about error handling in the ISR:
2009/9/1 s-paul...@ti.com:
From: Sandeep Paulraj s-paul...@ti.com
+ *
You're right about that. I was not questioning your code. That seems to
be o.k. for me (without having tested it). I was questioning your
comment on top of the function, as it describes something, that is not
implemented in your function. Only one out of three possible code paths
use
On Thursday 03 September 2009, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
I think these fixes are to be sent as incremental patches.
Yes. No more complete-driver-replacement patches please;
they impede reviewing.
Andrew may well merge them before he sends them upstream.
From: Sandeep Paulraj s-paul...@ti.com
The patch adds a SPI driver for the DaVinci series of SOCs
[dbrown...@users.sourceforge.net: fixes and cleanup]
Signed-off-by: Sandeep Paulraj s-paul...@ti.com
Signed-off-by: David Brownell dbrown...@users.sourceforge.net
Signed-off-by: Mark A. Greer
On Tuesday 01 September 2009, s-paul...@ti.com wrote:
From: Sandeep Paulraj s-paul...@ti.com
The patch adds a SPI driver for the DaVinci series of SOCs
[dbrown...@users.sourceforge.net: fixes and cleanup]
Signed-off-by: Sandeep Paulraj s-paul...@ti.com
Signed-off-by: David Brownell
