From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E0C4C0044D for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 18:57:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D48720719 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 18:57:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732397AbgCPS5p (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:57:45 -0400 Received: from asavdk4.altibox.net ([109.247.116.15]:49872 "EHLO asavdk4.altibox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732353AbgCPS5o (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:57:44 -0400 Received: from ravnborg.org (unknown [158.248.194.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by asavdk4.altibox.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A800C804DA; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:57:34 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:57:33 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Mark Brown Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Thierry Reding , Rob Herring , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Courbot , Andrzej Hajda , Brian Masney , Chris Zhong , Douglas Anderson , Guido Gunther , Heiko Schocher , Nikolaus Schaller , Hoegeun Kwon , Jagan Teki , Jerry Han , Jonathan Bakker , Laurent Pinchart , Lin Huang , Linus Walleij , linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, Marco Franchi , Marek Belisko , Maxime Ripard , Maxime Ripard , Nickey Yang , Paul Cercueil , Peter Rosin , Peter Ujfalusi , Purism Kernel Team , Robert Chiras , Sandeep Panda , Stefan Mavrodiev , Tomi Valkeinen , Tony Lindgren , Vinay Simha BN , Werner Johansson Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 02/36] dt-bindings: spi: support non-spi bindings as SPI slaves Message-ID: <20200316185733.GA18307@ravnborg.org> References: <20200315134416.16527-1-sam@ravnborg.org> <20200315134416.16527-3-sam@ravnborg.org> <20200316120239.GC5010@sirena.org.uk> <20200316132844.GA22822@ravnborg.org> <20200316163538.GJ5010@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200316163538.GJ5010@sirena.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CMAE-Score: 0 X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=XpTUx2N9 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=UWs3HLbX/2nnQ3s7vZ42gw==:117 a=UWs3HLbX/2nnQ3s7vZ42gw==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=lAQgYEA6ThzcfdfRarEA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Mark. On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:35:38PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 02:28:44PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:02:41PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 02:43:42PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > > > Independent bindings can be SPI slaves which for example is > > > > the case for several panel bindings. > > > > What is an "independent binding"? > > > For several panels we have device trees that looks like this: > > So what you're trying to do is define a generic class for SPI slaves > which are just normal children of SPI nodes? I really can't get to > there from your changelog so we need some work there - in particular > "non-spi bindings" is *very* confusing as as far as I can see these are > bindings for SPI devices. > > > The bindings are child of the spi controller node, but not specified > > in the same binding file as the spi controller node. > > Of course not, this how all buses work isn't it? > > > So SPI slaves can now reference spi-slave.yaml to get access to > > the SPI slave properties - and the copies can be avoided. > > Likewise spi-controller.yml now references spi-slave.yaml. > > > This was the best way I saw it could be done. > > Rob didn't do the binding conversion but he did review it - I'm a bit > surprised that there's issues here? For panels we have panel-common.yaml that list all the typical properties used by a panel - so the individual panel bindings shall not repeat them. This is also aligned with the principle of re-using properties rather than inventing new properties all over. And with a number of bindings describing HW that is SPI slaves the idea is to do something like we do for panels. I look forward for Rob's feedback - but as he is on vacation this week we may have to wait a week for that. The simple way forward had been to do like we do in many other places and include a few SPI properties and be done with it. This is an attempt to do something better. If there is push-back or a nack, then we can always do like we do in other places and just duplicate the properties. > Also shouldn't there be some constraint that these devices have to be > the child of a SPI controller or something? Just including a file > doesn't look right for something like class definition. It was the best I could come up with - and this patch was called out for review in the hope there is a better way than this patch. We have similar examples like: - pincfg-node.yaml - regulatro.yaml - dma-common.yaml They are not exactly 1:1 to what we do with spi-slave.yaml, but they served as inspiration. Sam