On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 02:58:54PM +0000, John Garry wrote: > On 10/01/2020 14:07, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:55:37AM +0000, John Garry wrote: > > > OK, so that's just reusing the DT binding in which case everything > > that's valid for the DT binding should also be valid for ACPI - I > > thought that actually worked automatically without you having to do > > anything in the code but ICBW. > I thought that it would be improper as we could be mixing ACPI methods to > describe the serial bus (SPI Serial Bus Connection Resource Descriptor) and > also DT properties which could conflict, like CS active high. Yes, that's one of the issues with importing bits of DT into ACPI unfortunately - you will get conflicts, it's not clear it's a good idea to be using PRP0001 for SPI stuff given that there's bus level bindings for both ACPI and SPI and they don't line up exactly. > However I do see extra properties than "compatible" being added in DSD for > PRP0001: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/662813/ (see EEPROM part) > And if we were to do this, I think that we would need to add some > device_property_read_u32("spi-rx-bus-width", ...), etc calls in the SPI FW > parsing for ACPI path - I couldn't see that. You'd need parsing code, yes.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
