On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 08:02:37AM +0200, Marcel Ziswiler wrote: > On 06/03/2014 12:16 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >Your DT is broken if it's got a "spidev" node in it, you should be > >describing the hardware not the Linux implementation of the software. > >It would be really nice if we had a good way of handling this but we > >don't yet. > I strongly disagree, it almost perfectly describes the hardware. Unlike on > I2c where modelling a bus is enough to allow generic user space access > unfortunately on SPI this is not enough as it requires a specific > chip-select as well. This is exactly what spidev does and maps to our > hardware perfectly which has one dedicated chip-select per SPI bus on a > dedicated header which allows our customers out-of-the-box spidev user space > access to almost any SPI device connected to those buses just like with > i2c-devs on I2C buses. When you say "generic user space access" you are describing a specific detail of how this device happens to be controlled with your software. This is not a description of your hardware, it is a description of how it is controlled with your current software.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
