On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 07:29:21PM +, Trent Piepho wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 10:03 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 06:34:18PM +, Trent Piepho wrote:
> > > I imagine it depends on what set_cs needs to do, which might not be
> > > solely related to changing the CS l
On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 10:03 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 06:34:18PM +, Trent Piepho wrote:
>
> > What about the calls to spi->controller->set_cs() after this? Should a
> > driver provided set_cs method be responsible for checking SPI_NO_CS?
> > Or should it not be called
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 06:34:18PM +, Trent Piepho wrote:
> What about the calls to spi->controller->set_cs() after this? Should a
> driver provided set_cs method be responsible for checking SPI_NO_CS?
> Or should it not be called in the first place?
This seems like something that should be
On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 10:23 +0100, Phil Elwell wrote:
> The SPI configuration state includes an SPI_NO_CS flag that disables
> all CS line manipulation, for applications that want to manage their
> own chip selects. However, this flag is ignored by the GPIO CS code
> in the SPI framework.
> @@ -72
The SPI configuration state includes an SPI_NO_CS flag that disables
all CS line manipulation, for applications that want to manage their
own chip selects. However, this flag is ignored by the GPIO CS code
in the SPI framework.
Correct this omission with a trivial patch.
Signed-off-by: Phil Elwel
5 matches
Mail list logo
