On 24 January 2018 at 14:54, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Ahh yes I see what you mean, agreed. I have changed my device to be a full controller. Thanks for the review. Ben -- 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