Hi Mark Brown,
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 04:59:11PM +0530, Rajeshwari Birje wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Rajeshwari Birje
>
>> >> This patch is still not setting bits_per_word_mask as far as I can see?
>
>> > Will send new version of patch including this.
>
>> I had some confusion regarding this bits_per_word_mask, where do you
>> want me to mask the bpw.
>> bits_per_word is something which comes from the user, do we need to mask it?
>
> Have you looked at the code and documentation for this feature - if it's
> not clear can you please explain in more detail what needs clarifying?
The following patch already sets bits_per_word_mask for
drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c in s3c64xx_spi_probe, hence I had a doubt do
I need to set the same again.
commit e761f4236e94f2dd36316f9892583b29ce986031
Author: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon Apr 1 14:17:37 2013 +0100
spi/s3c64xx: Convert to bits_per_word_mask
The core can do the validation for us.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
It is already present as follows in s3c64xx_spi_probe
master->bits_per_word_mask = SPI_BPW_MASK(32) | SPI_BPW_MASK(16) |
SPI_BPW_MASK(8);
--
Regards,
Rajeshwari Shinde
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
