On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:43:18PM -0700, Jiada Wang wrote: > The reason I gave the example use case is want to point out that > with Geert's patch set, a SPI device (with only one controller) can no > longer > act as master and slave at the same time. because IMO as a SPI core > function, > it needs to cover all the use cases, and to be as generic as possible. > BUT if you think the use case don't need to be supported from SPI core, > then I don't have objection either, I will only submit imx SPI slave support > patch, > after your SPI slave support patch set been applied I think there's a bunch of other problems with how that works reliably that'd need to be addressed before someone could actually do that, and it seems like such hardware will be very unusual.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
