On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 08:51:12AM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote: > 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. Which is exactly what my patch did but didn't seem like good enough for you at the time... Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
