On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:48 PM, David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote:
> You know, in retrospect, I shouldn't have put
> most of those SPI device setup params into the
> board setup data.

Out of curiosity, what was the reasoning behind registering the spi
board info separately instead of passing it explicitly via the spi bus
driver's platform_data?  (I ask only because I'm unfamiliar with the
history).

> There's one which MUST be there:  polarity of
> the chip select line.  The rest seem like they
> could (and arguably should) all be handled by
> driver-specific params.  (Possible exception:
> clock rate, which sometimes matters even when
> chips are not selected).

Of course, CS polarity and clock rate are more representative of the
interconnection than of the device.  Regardless though, it should be
done in such a way that a properly behaved spi_driver cannot change
the initial .probe() conditions.

> At any rate, adding MORE driver-specific params
> (like bits-per-word) to board setup data seems
> like the wrong direction to go...

indeed!

g.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________
spi-devel-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general

Reply via email to