Christian On 5/6/19 10:29 AM, Christian Mauderer wrote: > On 06/05/2019 17:15, Pavel Machek wrote: >> Hi! >> >>>> Of course it would have been possible to make it a lot more universal by >>>> for example adding a prefix, a bit mask or other word lengths. But that >>>> would have added a lot of complexity without any actual application. >>>> >>> >>> I have to disagree here. If this is supposed to be a universal SPI byte driver that >>> needs special handling then it is either needs to be created in a universal way or needs to be made >>> target specific. >>> >> >> Let him be. The driver is good. >> >> If some hardware needs more flexibility, we add it. >> >> No need to have 1000 releases of everything. >> >> Pavel >> > > Hello Pavel, > > thanks for the support. > > It's a pure hobby project so I have the time to add useful features or > to improve the description to make it clear what the drivers intention > is. So if we find a more useful set of features it's a good idea to > discuss it. > > By the way: Although I haven't written a Linux driver yet it's not my > first open source project. So I know that there can be a lot of > different opinions and sometimes a lot of revisions. So no big risk of > scaring me away. > Hopefully the feedback from all is helping you with developing kernel drivers :). One request though is can you slow down a bit in the versions? I had 3 versions in my inbox before I had a chance to review v1. I have been asked the same thing by someone and now I try to give at least 24-48 hours so others over seas can get a chance to review prior to posting a new version. Dan > Best regards > > Christian >
