On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 10:44:21AM +0100, Gustav Wiklander wrote: > On 1/4/21 10:34 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:34:35PM +0100, Gustav Wiklander wrote: > > > The spi framework sets the modalias for the spi device to belong in > > > either the acpi device table or the SPI device table. It can never > > > be in the OF table. Therefore the spidev driver should populate the > > > spi device table rather than the OF table. > > Why is this a good solution rather than ensuring the the OF IDs can be > > used directly? > You suggestion is of course a solid alternative forward. However, the > downside with supporting the OF device table for automatic module loading is > that a lot of spi device drivers must be updated. Also Is the module code too limited to cope with more than one table? > If adding support of OF device table the spi device drivers must now include > a MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of,...) as the spi device alias will no longer match > the alias in the module. > This command gives 186 spi device drivers. How about SPI drivers that already have an OF table and expect it to work, I rather suspect we have a lot of cases where people are adding SPI IDs to DT that don't appear in the module tables and frankly I think that's a reasonable expectation. If there's an issue here beyond missing MODULE_DEVICE_TABLEs in drivers I'd expect it to be fixed in the core, otherwise we're just leaving sharp edges for everyone.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
