On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 04:51:53PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote: > On Tuesday 26 November 2013 03:59 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > >>+ void (*configure_from_slave)(struct spi_device *spi, u8 *val); > >Clearly this is far too unstructured to be useful, this is only ever > >going to work with one specific combination of slave and master since > >there's absolutely no semantics defined. > I thought "val" might be good enuf, and this can be filled with whatever > data that need to be used from slave into master(irrespective of > slave and master?). The name isn't the issue, it's the fact that you're passing a completely unspecified blob of data.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
