Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932523AbcDSRMu (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:12:50 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:54818 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932404AbcDSRMs (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:12:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:12:39 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: "Reizer, Eyal" Cc: Kalle Valo , Eyal Reizer , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-spi@vger.kernel.org" Message-ID: <20160419171239.GC3217@sirena.org.uk> References: <1460273570-12298-1-git-send-email-eyalr@ti.com> <14313437.cDJIgY3kzo@wuerfel> <8665E2433BC68541A24DFFCA87B70F5B360BF614@DFRE01.ent.ti.com> <1463330011.BhWEcYYuGD@wuerfel> <8665E2433BC68541A24DFFCA87B70F5B360C0745@DFRE01.ent.ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4cv0JMvpEKiCIDl2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8665E2433BC68541A24DFFCA87B70F5B360C0745@DFRE01.ent.ti.com> X-Cookie: Tomorrow, you can be anywhere. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a01:348:6:8808:fab::3 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] wlcore: spi: add wl18xx support X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1349 Lines: 36 --4cv0JMvpEKiCIDl2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 09:05:45AM +0000, Reizer, Eyal wrote: > Understood. As this special CS manipulation is unique to wspi (wilink spi= ) I think the=20 > best option is to move this gpio allocation into wlcore_spi as a new devi= ce tree entry > used only by this driver. That sounds like it is going to break normal chip select operation which doesn't seem like a good idea either. What exactly are you trying to do here? If you need to send some extra bytes at the end of a transfer why not just do that, or add an empty transfer with a delay. It's hard to see what more you could do with only control of the chip select... --4cv0JMvpEKiCIDl2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXFmcGAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQV3cH/13tX6IFbyU7cJBFsp94l8u0 RZ8ygWZrra/QQMyPguVMdheFO50a6wPZL1nZ0iPa2Zp8b0RUCjCuuDxtjoJf5QD6 39GH1LuyIK122A2S1DG5aRP8HjUtrOT5s1oE8IwGSTxSow9E60bJPOHoDt23uoFi EDa6F+MnQ0QhPSQhKdUEwVCrNCep+qEmQxOT83fei+xd3MFAFtb9vTACNaPexOO4 iRU94K2wUO1np7ug8M9Q4Sx5inkXh+Fy3Ug34x2fWG8prhqa/TDXXfu/IyfDwlpM 0UIWRQheG7zxMdGqGsXL84gI4k6mNZKn0f37vwmGV3ioan07BzSY+LkBREXpv7I= =FdXk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4cv0JMvpEKiCIDl2--