Hi, On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:14:10PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 02:51:13PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > General problem: > > ================ > > > The SPI core doesn't use the OF compatible property for generating > > uevent/modalias, and therefore can't autoload modules based on the full > > compatible property of a device. It *only* can use the 'modalias', which > > is a castrated version of the compatible property -- it only includes > > part of the 1st entry in 'compatible'. > > > This forces SPI device drivers to use spi_device_id tables even when > > they might be better suited for of_match_tables. > > Well, I don't actually see this as that bad a thing - it's good practice > to include the Linux ID tables even if you also support DT since not all > the world is DT. I suppose so, but that's still not the whole story. (I believe I avoided this in the first place for mostly-aesthetic reasons; technically this allows people to put garbage in their DT, like "garbage,spi-nor". It's unclear whether "garbage" becomes part of the mythical DT ABI [1].) > > Specifics for m25p80: > > ===================== > > > We support many flash devices and have traditionally been doing so by > > simply adding more entries to the spi_device_id table. Recently, we have > > tried to get away from adding new entries and aliases for every single > > variation by instead supporting a common OF match: "jedec,spi-nor". So > > we might expect to see nodes like this: > > > flash@xxx { > > compatible = "vendor,shiny-new-device", "jedec,spi-nor"; > > ... > > }; > > > We may or may not add "shiny-new-device" to the spi_device_id array. But > > "jedec,spi-nor" should be sufficient to load the driver and check if the > > READ ID string matches any known flash. If "shiny-new-device" isn't in > > the spi_device_id array, then we don't get module autoloading. > > OK, so you're trying to do dynamic enumeration? Then you don't want > specific things in any of the ID tables since you'll match it yourself > at runtime (which is obviously good). Well, we do have to support existing cases (e.g., existing device trees without "jedec,spi-nor") so we have to keep some around. But otherwise, mostly yes. > > There's also the case of omitting "vendor,shiny-new-device" entirely, > > which is probably a little more dangerous, but still legal (and also > > won't autoload modules): > > > flash@xxx { > > compatible = "jedec,spi-nor"; > > ... > > }; > > My immediate thought is that I'd expect to see spi-nor and (based on a > quick scan of the m25p80 driver) nor-jedec to appear in the spi_device_id > table since regardless of what happens with Javier's patch we want the > autoprobing mechanism to work for board file based platforms too > (there's a bunch of architectures that still use them). That'd also > have the side effect of solving your immediate problem I think? No "nor-jedec" -- that was an intermediate name that got replaced mid-release-cycle due to some late DT review comments. But yes, I suppose adding "spi-nor" back to the spi_device_id table fixes *one* of the immediate problems (i.e., 'compatible = "jedec,spi-nor"'). That would cover Heiner's report. But it doesn't solve: compatible = "vendor,shiny-new-device", "jedec,spi-nor" I believe that the latter is sometimes the Right Way (TM) to do things for device tree, so you have a fallback if auto-probing "jedec,spi-nor" ever doesn't suffice. (This came up in Heiner's original post: "In case of m25p80 this means that "jedec,spi-nor" has to be the first "compatible" value. This constraint might be too strict ..") > [Snip example with three different prefixes for m25p80 in compatible > strings] > > > All three are supported by SPI's current modalias code, and so are part > > of the ABI. Thus, m25p80.c will always contain both a spi_device_id > > table and an of_match_table. But I think Javier's patch would break > > these three cases. > > Right, IIRC I think that sort of thing was what I was looking for in > documentation for his patch. Now you mention it I'm not sure we can do > wildcarding with DT which is a bit unfortunate for cases like this. Yeah, I expect wildcards are a no-go. > Hrm. Not sure and it's getting late on a Friday night... :) I suspect we'll have to fully support both spi_device_id tables (fully supported already; if nothing else, to keep wildcard matching) and of_match_tables (not fully supported for module loading), and in some cases, the two will have to stay partially in sync. Brian [1] "Device Tree as a stable ABI: a fairy tale?" http://free-electrons.com/pub/conferences/2015/elc/petazzoni-dt-as-stable-abi-fairy-tale/petazzoni-dt-as-stable-abi-fairy-tale.pdf -- 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