On 1/24/19 3:23 AM, masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, >> "Marek Vasut" <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx> >> 2019/01/24 上午 09:54 >> >> >> > +#define RPC_CMNCR 0x0000 // R/W >> >> Is there any reason for using those horrible C++ comments ? > > By Mark's comments for the SPDX header needs to be C++ style and > I patch the whole RPC driver comments using C++ style otherwise it looks > messy. I think the C++ comments should only be applied to the SPDX identifier, maybe the header, but not the entire file. >> [...] >> >> > +module_platform_driver(rpc_spi_driver); >> >> RPC is not a SPI controller, it's a SPI and HF controller. >> >> Also, how difficult will it be to add the HF support ? > > One of my customers needs RPC SPI driver for our company's > Octal-Flash,MX25UW51245G. > We don't have HF product and hope you could understanding. I am worried that when we need to add RPC HF support (which is what all boards but the D3 Draak use), we will have to rewrite the entire driver and/or convert it to MFD and that would be a tremendous undertaking. I'd prefer to have the driver ready for the HF addition before it's accepted upstream. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut
