Re: [spi-devel-general] adding bits_per_word to struct spi_board_info to mirror struct spi_device

["Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@gmail.com>]

On 5/8/07, David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On Monday 07 May 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 4/25/07, David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 25 April 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > is there something obvious i'm missing ?  seems to me that if the
> > > > generic spi framework respects bits_per_word on a per-spi device
> > > > basis, then it should be exposed in the generic info structure so that
> > > > the setting can be tracked in the boards file ...
> > >
> > > The initial driver set didn't need it, that's all.  ISTR someone
> > > else pointed out this quirk, but never provided a patch to resolve
> > > the issue.
> >
> > so which direction should it be ?  or should it be both ? :)
>
> Add bits_per_word to spi_board_info, and have the device creation
> logic copy it into spi_device as it's created.

OK

> > Blackfin at the moment is doing DMA/bits_per_word setup in the boards
> > ... we could move these to the drivers and have each one just call
> > spi_setup() at init, or i could post a patch for the common framework
> > if you think that's an OK direction to [also] go ...
>
> I don't see what you're getting at here.  The SPI core doesn't
> do anything with DMA, beyond passing DMA addresses through when
> necessary.  (Needed to handle messages derived from scatterlists,
> since I don't want lower layers to know scatterlists, but otherwise
> uncommon.)

sorry, i didnt mean to confuse things ... i was referring to the only
things that we are configuring at the moment on a per-spi device basis
in Blackfin is bits_per_word and DMA status ... when i said posting a
patch for common framework, i was referring to just bits_per_word
-mike