On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 12:47:13 +0800 David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday 29 December 2009, Erwin Authried wrote: > > I think there's no need for a MAX3100 **and** a MAX3110 driver, > > this is just confusing. The MAX3110 driver is identical to the > > MAX3100 from the software view, it is simply a MAX3100 with > > transceivers added to the chip. If there's any improvement, that > > should be merged into the existing MAX3100 driver. > > Assuming that's true ... who will resolve the issue? > Hi David, I've answered Erwin's comments before in v1 submission cycle, following is the quote: "I agree there should not be 2 drivers cover 1 family of HW, so this is a RFC. I've thinked about merge with current 3100 code, but it depends on one char per spi_transfer, while my driver relys on batch data transfer for efficiency. Another key point is the console, SPI UART can't be directly accessed by CPU, so every spi_transfer will go through tasklet/workqueue, which makes supporting printk a big part of my driver." I really did consider about that, but has no good clue, so I think better to shape my driver first. Thanks, Feng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
