On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 03:06:34PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 14:37 -0400, Matt Porter wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 08:42:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > >
> > > Can't we come up with a version of dma_request_slave_channel that works
> > > both ways for now:
> > >
> > > mcspi_dma->dma_rx =
> > > dma_request_slave_channel_compat(mask, omap_dma_filter_fn, &sig,
> > > &master->dev, mcspi_dma->dma_rx_ch_name);
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Then it's just question of patching away two lines later on rather than
> > > having to add all this if else to all the drivers first, then patching
> > > it away again.
> >
> > I think that something like that is workable with the implementation
> > simply checking for of_node to do the right thing.
> Yes, I think it would be better to have common API but underneath two
> implementations in transitional phase.
Ok, I'll implement something for discussion in the v2 series.
-Matt