> -----Original Message----- > From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longch...@keymile.com] > Sent: 29 May 2012 14:03 > To: Prafulla Wadaskar > Cc: holger.bru...@keymile.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions > board_spi_claim/release_bus > > On 05/24/2012 10:38 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longch...@keymile.com] > >> Sent: 16 May 2012 16:24 > >> To: Prafulla Wadaskar; holger.bru...@keymile.com > >> Cc: Valentin Longchamp; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck; > Prafulla > >> Wadaskar > >> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] spi/kirkwood: add weak functions > >> board_spi_claim/release_bus > >> > >> This allows a final, board specific, step in the claim/relase_bus > >> function for the SPI controller, which may be needed for some > hardware > >> designs. > > > > NAK, this is not needed if earlier two patches in the patch series > are in place. > > > > In our case, this is still needed. As I had already explained you in > the > previous discussion, even with the generic approach, our hardware > design > requires one access to an additional signal (a GPIO) to configure an > external HW > multiplexer which is present to electrically remove the Nand Flash > device from > the signals used by the SPI bus and put it back when the accesses are > over. > > That's why my first implementation was only relying on these weak > functions.
Okay, got it, on your board, apart from MPPs, you need additional control. BTW: if NF_CEn could have been used this additional GPIO would not have needed. But any ways we cannot change your h/w now :-) So in that case it makes sense to expose these weak functions. Regards.. Prafulla . . . _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
