On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:55:44PM +0200, Martin Sperl wrote: > As this code is from 2008 the situation may be different > now and we can use spi_sync instead? Yes, that seems sensible. I can't think of any reason why it shouldn't have done that in the first place. For things like this please just provide a patch directly, it's much quicker and easier.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
