On Thu, 8 May 2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message Pine.LNX.4.64.0805082103120.8518@axis700.grange you wrote:
Of course, your solution will work with multiple, different SPI controllers while mine won't, but is that really necessary?
Your solution comes with more error checking as well, which might be a good thing, but since it comes with a cost of additional memory and flash footprint, I think it should be optional. Maybe we could provide some library functions to simplify the drivers that want this?
I see. Well, I don't have a strong preference. So, either we need more votes, or the one who implements it decides:-)
That was two pros - did I miss any cons ?
I think, those were two pros - but for two somewhat different solutions.
Oops?
"your solution will work with multiple, different SPI controllers" and "Your solution comes with more error checking as well" seem to me as if it were 2 x pro for your code.
Am I missing something?
Haavard also named disadvantages of my proposal - like larger storage and memory footprint, higher complexity, etc. And as he is going to implement it, I think, he has the final say on this - until we see the code at least:-) He also has more experience with SPI than I. Of course, I feel a bit uncomfartable building restrictions in directly during design, like inability to use different SPI controllers, but I cannot estimate how probable it is, that we ever have to deal with this in U-Boot.
Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de