Hello Mark, On 11/16/2015 02:49 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 02:19:27PM -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> On 11/13/2015 08:48 PM, Brian Norris wrote: > >>> (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].) > >> I don't believe your examples are part of the mythical DT ABI. What I >> understand is that an ABI is whatever is documented in the DT binding >> docs but the only document that mentions the m25p80 is: > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.txt > > Not really, in practice an ABI is something that people notice breaking. > This means that if enough people ship an undocumented ABI (or it goes > into important enough products) it's just as good as something that's > documented, perhaps better than something that's documented and nobody > ever uses as an ABI. > I see, fair enough. Let's see what Brian say about the spi-nor case and I'll also post my RFC patch but as a proper patch and adding the comments you asked me later today. It would be unfortunate if the SPI drivers would have as a requirement to always have an SPI device ID table even for OF-only IPs but I don't think that is that bad either. Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America -- 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