[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:59:56 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
To: Ivo Sieben <meltedpianoman@...il.com>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-v3] Support M95040 SPI EEPROM
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 09:21:57AM +0200, Ivo Sieben wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Op 3 april 2012 19:17 heeft Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de> het
> volgende geschreven:
> >
> >> > > > +#define EE_INSTR_BIT3_IS_ADDR 0x0010
> >> > >
> >> > > Is there some guarantee that this chip flag will always have this
> >> > > meaning?
> >> >
> >> > ? This is a driver flag.
> >>
> >> Sorry, I don't see it set anywhere, so unclear on where it comes from.
> >> I thought it was from a generic spi probe.
> >
> > Yeah, agreed, 'struct spi_eeprom' does not sound much like platform_data :/
> > Thanks for checking.
>
> The flag is indeed used in the platform initialization to enable the
> "address bit" behavior, so you don't see it set anywhere in this patch
> (and not anywhere in the kernel, since no board uses this flag yet).
>
> Is it OK if we leave this patch like this?
Yes. This is a useful extension and there will be boards using it.
Thanks,
Wolfram
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists