[PATCH V3 4/5] spi: s3c64xx: Added provision for dedicated cs pin
Girish KS
girishks2000 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 8 07:52:29 EDT 2013
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Girish KS <girishks2000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Mark Brown
> <broonie at opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 03:21:03PM +0530, Girish KS wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Mark Brown
>>
>>> > It's also a bit odd that we end up checking cs_gpio and then using line
>>> > in the code, it'd be more idiomatic if cs_gpio were the GPIO number.
>>
>>> In the original driver it was assumed that the cs line is always a gpio pin.
>>> But the current controller that i am working on has no gpio pin for cs
>>> selection.
>>> All the lines to the device are internally connected. There is no
>>> option to select
>>> the cs signal. So cs-gpio property parsing has to skipped for this
>>> controller, that means
>>> cs_gpio cannot be a GPIO number. If it has to be a number then it has
>>> to be < 0 to say
>>> it is not gpio. Any >= 0 number implies it is a valid gpio (in reality
>>> for this controller it is not.)
>>
>> Two options here, one is to just assume nobody will use GPIO 0 and the
>> other is to set the number appopriately during probe so that only probe
>> needs to worry about the issue.
>
> regarding the first option, may be others also should agree to it (in
> case if somebody is
> using the gpio 0).
> In the second option if the gpio number is set in the probe, then we
> are overwriting the
> actual gpio number assigned in the platform data.
> If I move the cs_gpio from the platform data to controller private
> data then the dependency
> on other platforms can be removed, but still the check (true or false)
> before setting the gpio
> line will remain. If agreed upon this i can go ahead and post the patch
Sorry for the allignment. there is some issue with my interface
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list