-----Original Message----- From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp@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 . . .