On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 04:41:50PM +0200, Guillaume Stols wrote: > > On 9/21/24 23:55, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:33:22PM +0000, Guillaume Stols wrote: > > > The SPI conditions are not always required, because there is also a > > > parallel interface. The way used to detect that the SPI interface is > > > used is to check if the reg value is between 0 and 256. > > And, yaknow, not that the bus you're on is a spi bus? I don't think this > > comment is relevant to the binding, especially given you have a property > > for it. > > Apologies, I missed to change the commit message, it will be fixed in the > next series. > > Since Jonathan did not like very much inferring the interface with the reg's > value that I used i the previous verison, I introduced this flag. > > However this is only intended to be use in bindings, to determine whether or > not spi properties should be added. To be honest, if it is not needed by software to understand what bus the device is on, it shouldn't be in the bindings at all. What was Jonathan opposed to? Doing an if reg < 1000: do y, otherwise do x? I'd not bother with any of that, and just make cpha (or w/e it was) optional with a description explaining the circumstances in which is it needed. > In the driver side of things, the bus interface is inferred by the parent's > node (SPI driver is an module_spi_driver while parallel driver is > module_platform_driver).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
