RE: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support

[Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@xxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 19:25, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 2020年8月24日 19:25
> To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: kuldip dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> linux-spi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Qiang Zhao
> <qiang.zhao@xxxxxxx>; Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@xxxxxxx>; Varun Sethi
> <V.Sethi@xxxxxxx>; Tanveer Alam <tanveer.alam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support
> 
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 06:21:18PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 07:37:25PM +0530, Kuldip Dwivedi wrote:
> 
> > > > The whole point with the device property API is that it works with
> > > > both DT and ACPI without needing separate parsing, though in this
> > > > case I'm wondering why we'd need to specify this in an ACPI system
> > > > at all?
> 
> > > Understood. Will take care in v2 PATCH
> 
> > IMO there is zero reason for the existence of the "spi-num-chipselects"
> > property even for DT. We should deprecate it (start ignoring it in
> > existing device tree deployments) and populate struct
> > fsl_dspi_devtype_data with that info based on SoC compatible string.
> 
> Yes, it's a legacy from bad board file conversions and shouldn't be used at all.

I saw a lot of driver assign spi_controller -> num_chipselect directly, should we do like that?

BR
Qiang Zhao