On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 02:01:55PM +0000, Ben Whitten wrote: > On 23 January 2018 at 11:11, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > level. Things that have their own transfer function would be better off > > just being first order SPI controllers I think so that they get access > > to everything the framework offers and can correctly advertise > > capabilities and so on. > This runs as a very simple fake SPI controller per bus that the mux is > controlling. Having this custom transfer message allowed me to pop > in the way my device exposes the downstream devices, through its > regmap. Which like I say is a problem - if your device (which just sounds like a SPI controller) has different capabilities and constraints to the parent then client drivers won't see that.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
