> -----Original Message----- > From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longch...@keymile.com] > Sent: 04 April 2012 12:32 > To: Prafulla Wadaskar > Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Gerlando Falauto; Holger Brunck > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions > board_spi_bus_claim/release > ...snip...
> > > > > Any ways, these are requirements, s/w has framework in place, so why > not to use it in generic way? > > > > Anyways, you are the custodian and even if I'm still not completely > convinced by > your arguments I will do it your way. Let's end this discussion here > and next > time I will come back to you about it, it will be with a patch doing > bit masking > on a new CONFIG_SYS_KW_SPI_MPP to know which MPP are used by the SPI > controller. Dear Valentin, What ever you have implemented for spi_claim/release, I have suggested to move it to driver specific code so that it can be reused. That is a good feature that Kirkwood_spi driver is missing. I am thankful to you that you have addressed this through your requirement. BTW: it's not matter of custodian :-) no one is great on this earth!! We can keep discussion on convincing each other, but that is not our objective here. Let's keep evolving u-boot code for it's better usability. Thanks for your understanding and closure on this discussion. Regards. Prafulla . . . _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
