On 03/31/2015 07:47 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 08:46:10AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: >> On 03/27/2015 06:53 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:55:49AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > >>> Please fix your mail client to word wrap within paragraphs at less than >>> 80 columns - this makes your mails easier to read and reply to. > >> You are the first one who had problem with this. But I have setup lower >> limit and hopefully it is better now. > > That looks better, yes... I may just be the first one who's bothered > remarking on this. yes and I definitely thank you for that. >>>> On 03/08/2015 08:00 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 01:55:14PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > >>> Remember that we can at least in theory have additional chip selects >>> that aren't controlled by the IP block but are instead GPIOs. > >> I agree with you but this can be generic case for every SPI driver. Also >> using external decoder is possible for every driver. Maybe there are >> others options via I2C too. > > Remember that this in the context of me saying I don't think num-cs is > a particularly good idea at all... yes. >>> There's >>> also some potential confusion for users between the number of chip >>> selects in use in a given system and the size of the bitfield that the >>> driver needs to take care of. > >> num-ss-bits is autogenerated directly from design tools for particular >> hardware design and this size is exactly setup and hardcoded. (num-cs >> can be just the same case) >> If there are 5 bits there are 5 wires from IP. And value of num-ss-bits >> and num-cs will be the same. > > But what your patch did was *replace* num-ss-bits in the binding, not > just add it. yes. Sync binding was the main my point. >> If user wants to use less lines then physically available we could >> potentially extend binding to say. num-ss-bit - number of chip selects >> available in hardware. num-cs - number of chip selects used by the driver. >> But I expect that this will be rejected because it is software setting >> not hardware description. > > num-cs *is* a software setting. ok - what to do with that? Remove it because it shouldn't be passed via DT? Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html