On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 09:37:14AM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 04:03:16PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > Which nobody should be doing since it's already totally broken for > > something to be using this on the DT side except in the one case of the > > Rohm device which is listed there. I don't want to merge anything which > > allows the breakage we're seeing with people putting spidev in their DTs > > to be propagated into ACPI, at most we should have something that > > specifically identifies individual devices only. > It is pretty convenient for testing SPI bus and that's why I thought > it would be good to have possibility to enumerate this in similar way > than DT does but I understand your point. My intention is to break this for DT, at least make it scream loud warnings when it's used if not actually fail.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
