On 11.03.21 15:21, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 15:14-20210311, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > [...] > >>> >>> See [1] compare the compatibles against >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings -> I think you should describe what >>> your hardware really is though. >> >> This SPI bus is routed to an Arduino connector. By default, userspace >> (e.g. mraa) takes ownership and adds the desired logic for what is being >> connected. We have no idea what shield or other extension the user adds, >> though. > > overlays look like the right approach for variable systems like these. > It is not exactly plug and play.. but it does provide a level of > flexibility that is helpful. Yes, that's for extensions which have kernel drivers. The default model here is userspace, though. Will add as a separate patch to our queue for now. > > [..] >> The problem here is not simple txt->yml conversion: There is no official >> binding for spidev yet, just existing users and the driver waiting for them. >> > > I think we should discuss in the spidev list to get it resolved. > >>> Thanks.. While it might help me personally to get some on my internal >>> farm, it might be good to get them on kernelci as well on the longer >>> run. >>> >> >> Will keep that on the radar. I definitely want to get it into the CIP >> LAVA lab which is testing LTS as well. > > Cool. > >> Are we talking about spidev here? Then let's drop that node, but I do >> need to know how to describe spidev properly > > yes - the spidev is my problem. can you drop the node and repost? i cant > locally modify and hope it works. > Done. >> >> Or is it about those other warnings coming from your dtsi files, now >> being surfaced? If you can tell me how to resolve them, I can write patches. > > I will look at the warnings later today.. I dont think they are > triggered by the board dts. > That was also my interpretation of the results. Some are even just copies from what you get for the EVM boards. Jan -- Siemens AG, T RDA IOT Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
