On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 10:16:36AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 04:46:59PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 02:32:02PM +0200, Angelo Dureghello wrote: > > > From: Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Add bus property. > > > > RFC it may be, but you do need to explain what this bus-type actually > > describes for commenting on the suitability of the method to be > > meaningful. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/dac/adi,axi-dac.yaml | 9 +++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/dac/adi,axi-dac.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/dac/adi,axi-dac.yaml > > > index a55e9bfc66d7..a7ce72e1cd81 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/dac/adi,axi-dac.yaml > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/dac/adi,axi-dac.yaml > > > @@ -38,6 +38,15 @@ properties: > > > clocks: > > > maxItems: 1 > > > > You mentioned about new compatible strings, does the one currently > > listed in this binding support both bus types? > > > > Making the bus type decision based on compatible only really makes sense > > if they're different versions of the IP, but not if they're different > > configuration options for a given version. > > > > Yeah, in general the parent defines the bus type. Right, if the bus that's being used isn't spi anymore, you should be able to detect that without a property. However, the device that "left" the spi bus is not this "adi,axi-dac" it is the adi,ad3552r. I think this property is actually representing the bus that this adi,axi-dac is /providing/, rather than the bus it is "consuming".
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
