On 5/24/2016 4:34 PM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 5/24/2016 11:32 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Christer Weinigel wrote: >>> On 05/24/2016 07:20 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >> >>>> I'm not sure this is something we want to support at all, I can't >>>> immediately see anything that does this deliberately in the SPI >>>> code and obviously the "bus number" is something of a Linux >>>> specific concept which would need some explanation if we were going >>>> to document it. It's something I'm struggling a bit to see a >>>> robust use case for that isn't better served by parsing sysfs, >>>> what's the goal here? >> >>> If this isn't something that should be in the Documentation/devicetree >>> because it's not generig enough, where should Linux-specific >>> interpretations such as this be documented? >> >> I'm not clear that we want to document this at all since I am not clear >> that there is a sensible use case for doing it. I did ask for one but >> you've not articulated one in this reply. I am much less gung ho than >> Grant on this one, even as a Linux specific interface it seems very >> legacy. >> > > The time for the use case was when the patch was accepted. I phrased that sentence poorly. A more clear wording is: The time for the use case was when the source code patch was accepted (commit bb29785e0d6d150181704be2efcc3141044625e2). > > It is in the kernel, it is appropriate to document it. > > -Frank > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
