On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 21 May 2008, Grant Likely wrote: > >> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > Right again - _rare_ corner cases. Whereas we are talking about _all_ SPI >> > busses, maybe apart from those, where the controller itself switches CSs >> > in a well-defined way, and the driver doesn't need any additional >> > information to handle this. >> >> Ah, I see where we are crossing our wires. I was talking about the >> case of registering spi devices. I agree that the spi bus should not >> need any additional information. > > No, sorry for not making it clear. I wrote "busses" because on those > controllers, that control CS themselves _devices_ don't need any > additional info. But I meant, that describing SPI _devices_ should be done > in only one way or another - either using fdt, or platform data, not both.
Yes, I agree with that too... with the one caveat that platform code should have some method to supplement the data in the device tree *only when it is absolutely necessary to do so*. (note: I say 'platform code' here, not 'platform data'. They are two different things) I make no claims on what that method should be at this time. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
