On Monday 14 December 2015 01:01 PM, Bin Meng wrote:
Hi Jagan,
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Jagan Teki <jt...@openedev.com> wrote:
Used mode member from spi_slave{} instead of op_mode_tx.
Cc: Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jt...@openedev.com>
---
Changes for v2:
- none
drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c | 2 +-
drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c | 4 ++--
drivers/spi/ich.c | 2 +-
include/spi.h | 8 ++------
4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
index 0cafc29..3519ffd 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ static int spi_flash_std_write(struct udevice *dev, u32
offset, size_t len,
#if defined(CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_SST)
if (flash->flags & SNOR_F_SST_WR) {
- if (flash->spi->op_mode_tx & SPI_OPM_TX_BP)
+ if (flash->spi->mode & SPI_TX_BP)
Did you ever build this? spi->mode is declared as a u8, but SPI_TX_BP is 0x100.
Look like I sent the wrong patch, I made mode as uint will send that.
thanks!
--
Jagan
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
