On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 03:28:30PM +0900, Youngmin Nam wrote: > On 2016년 02월 10일 01:10, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:26:25AM +0900, Youngmin Nam wrote: > > I disagree that it is useless to do this, it means that if we realize > > later that there is some other difference between the implementations > > then we have the information in the DT to handle this without needing > > to update the ABI. > To clarify, let me check that I understood. > Do you mean we can fix fifosize of each SPI channel with DT handling > if there is difference on this fifosize with driver code? > > If I understand your words correctly, let me modify commit messages. I'm having a hard time understanding what you're saying here but it sounds like you've understood the oppositve of my intention here. I'm saying that it's not clear to me that this is better than adding more compatibles. At the very least we need a new compatible which requires this property as Krzysztof was suggesting.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
