Bah! Your reply-to: address is broken. Check your email client. let me try that again...
On 9/23/05, Grant Likely <glikely at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. > > First off, I've included the linuxppc-embedded mailing list in my > reply. It's better to mail the list and CC: me rather than just > mailing me. There are many others far brighter than me on the list > who can provide far more help. > > On 9/22/05, Frank Bennett <bennett78 at digis.net> wrote: > > Gary: > My name is Grant > > > > > I saw your patch on http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc > > I'm developing a SPI driver for the Lite5200. > Are you using a PSC or the SPI peripheral? The driver I've written is for a > PSC > > > > What distribution of Linux is this for? > Any distro you want. It should apply cleanly against any recent 2.6.x kernel > > > What is this patch registry all about? > Are you refering to the bit about device drivers registering to the > SPI subsystem? If so, the first patch provides the generic SPI > infrastructure. Device drivers for SPI masters and SPI slaves > register to the SPI subsystem. That way SPI master device drivers are > decoupled from SPI slave device drivers. It follows the new device > model in the 2.6.x kernels. (See "Linux Device Drivers" book from > O'reilly for details. > > > Can I get a snapshot of the mpc52xx driver stuff? > I've made no changes since posting the patch. > > Eventually I'll have a public git tree with all my changes posted in > it; but not yet. > > > How can I contribute to this effort? > Write code, write documentation and post patches. Also, look in the > LKML archives. There are two other competing SPI implementations that > are being developed. I've been pulled off onto other work so I've not > done any additional work. The other code looks more promising. > > That being said, my code works for me so it may be usable for you as-is. > > cheers, > g. >
