On 21/04/2022 11:11, Jerry Huang wrote: >> Please also answer Michael's comments. >> >> [Jerry Huang] I double checked the MikroBus devices, we used two MikcroBus devices: >> BLE P click: https://www.mikroe.com/ble-p-click >> BEE click: https://www.mikroe.com/bee-click >> Both of them are SPI interface connect to ls1028ardb through MiKcroBus interface. >> So the name "semtech sx1301" is not correct for this node. > > I asked to remove the words "Devicetree bindings" and this was not finished. > > Now you mention that entire name of device is wrong... It's confusing. I > don't know what device you are describing here. I expect you know. :) > > What is this binding about exactly? I *think* it's just exposing the mikrobus connector as an spidev device. There was a former attempt by Vladimir here [1]. Now as it the nature of such a connector that you can connect a myriad of devices there, it doesn't really make sense to have a just particular one described. What happens if that one will switch from spidev to a real driver in the kernel? So using "spidev" for the compatible would be the first reflex. But as described in the spidev driver this is plain wrong (and also causes a warning/info message it) because it should describe the actual hardware. Thus I proposed to use DT overlays which are loaded according to what is actually attached to the header, so a real driver could be loaded. But there *could* be a sane default which then could be replaced in an DT overlay. Like "mirkobus-socket" or similar, which might expose spidev. Actually it is more than just SPI, there is GPIO and resets and I2C. Maybe it should be an MFD? I don't know. But that is something for the DT maintainers to decide if they'll allow such "generic" devices. -michael [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20200318001603.9650-13-olteanv@xxxxxxxxx/
