On 04/10/2022 14:15, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 01:19:33PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> + # Ocelot-ext VSC7512 >>> + - | >>> + spi { >>> + soc@0 { >> >> soc in spi is a bit confusing. > > Do you have a better suggestion for a node name? This is effectively a > container for peripherals which would otherwise live under a /soc node, /soc node implies it does not live under /spi node. Otherwise it would be /spi/soc, right? > if they were accessed over MMIO by the internal microprocessor of the > SoC, rather than by an external processor over SPI. > >> How is this example different than previous one (existing soc example)? >> If by compatible and number of ports, then there is no much value here. > > The positioning relative to the other nodes is what's different. Positioning of nodes is not worth another example, if everything else is the same. What is here exactly tested or shown by example? Using a device in SPI controller? Best regards, Krzysztof