On 26 April 2015 at 17:47, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 04:40:50PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've a feeling everyone in this thread is ignoring the >> raspberry pi use-case. Where the board is specifically >> designed for educational purposes and used with lots of >> peripherals which are usually programmed from userspace >> using e.g. python bindings for i2c-dev or spidev, for >> such a setup we really want spidev to be loaded on the >> spibus by default and we really do not have a proper >> compatible for a child device. > > I'm not sure we're ignoring it, it just is the exact same use case > than the whole spidev use case: people want to write SPI userspace > drivers, the rpi really is not special here, except maybe for its user > space code base, but it really boils down to the same issue. > >> And no having to use per device devicetree overlays >> for this is not the answer, this needs to be really >> really easy. With pre device-tree kernels this just >> works, we should be able to match that ease of use >> with devicetree. > > We do agree on that. We repeatedly told that the DT was not a good > solution, overlays or not, and this is exactly one of the reasons. > Ok, so how about skipping the bindings altogether. Just instantiate a spidev for each SPI bus and each CS the SPI core knows of once spidev is loaded. Thanks Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html