
4 Aug
2014
4 Aug
'14
4:09 p.m.
On Monday, August 04, 2014 at 04:02:42 PM, Tom Rini wrote: [...]
Eeep. That seems very likely to be gotten incorrect by users.
Can we do something like: mxc_spi.c: __weak int board_map_spi_cs_value(int desired_cs) { return -EINVAL; }
fooboard.c: board_map_spi_cs_value(int desired_cs) { if (desired_cs == 0) return IMX_GPIO_NR(2, 30); else return -EINVAL; }
I think it'll be very bad if the user has to type 'sf probe 0:15872' or 'sf probe 15872' since that's a programming detail rather than saying bank 2, gpio 30 (which I assume is what IMX_GPIO_NR means).
I'm worried about the user scripts which depend on this original behavior. Do we care about compatibility there ?
Best regards, Marek Vasut