Re: spidev: Instantiating from DT as "spidev"

[Trent Piepho <tpiepho-cgc2CodaaHDQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On Wed, 2017-11-29 at 23:18 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 
> To me, the above sounds a bit contradictive: either you have
>   1. a simple (trivial) description, which can be handled by spidev and
>      userspace, and thus by just writing "<unit-addr> spidev" to a new_device
>      sysfs node, or
>   2. a complex description, for which you need a specialized in-kernel driver,
>      so you're gonna need a real DT node (and overlays?) to describe it.
> 
> I don't think writing a complex description to a new_device sysfs node makes
> sense.

Is there anything one can do with new_device that can't be done with a
dt fragment?

I2C added that feature a long time ago, when we were still largely
using platform_data and board files and device tree fragments didn't
exist.  It seems obsolete to me.  Maybe easier to use if you limit
yourself to what's in busybox, but I think one could write a simple
shell script that makes it just as simple to create new devices with dt
fragments as with new_device.