[PATCH 4/7] at91: remove non used at91_spi.h

On 07/15/11 17:46, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

On 13:47 Fri 15 Jul     , Detlef Vollmann wrote:

quoted

Sorry, I couldn't find a summary message for this patch series,
so I picked this one to reply, because this one hurts me most.

On 07/15/11 01:52, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD<redacted>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre<redacted>
---
   arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h |   81

----------------------------

quoted

   1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
   delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h

[...]

First, I'm actually using mach/at91_spi.h in an SPI slave driver.
And I'm using arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h instead of
drivers/spi/atmel_spi.h (which still exists in the kernel version
we use here), because arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_spi.h
is accessible from an out-of-tree driver w/o extra effort.

And this applies to all all of those header files, so I'm
really against all patches in this series.

You need the use SPI framework for this

I think you reply here to the wrong part of my message.
This part here is about the whole patch series, as I didn't
get a summary message for the patch series.

About the SPI driver:
 From Documentation/spi/spi-summary:
"At this writing, Linux has no slave side programming interface."
So there's no SPI framwork that covers the slave side.

Out of tree driver is not enough good reason to keep it

As there's currently no slave support in-tree, any Linux device
that's an SPI slave needs an out-of-tree driver.

And again, there's no rationale given for moving all the other
headers from an genarally accessible place to a generally
inaccessible place, so I'm still against the whole patch series.

Regards,
   Detlef