Re: SPI loopback tests

[Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1110 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 11:16:07AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 10:10:56AM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 06:26:45PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 06:12:38PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> 
> > > > Not sure that there should be a "linux," vendor prefix though, there's
> > > > nothing linux-specific about doing loopback. Probably should be
> > > > vendor-less?
> 
> > > I think at this point it's old enough that it's just ABI and adding the
> > > option of having it vendorless would just cause people to ask why.
> 
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "it's old enough", as this proposed loopback
> > compatible is new, right? Don't think this is any different to i2c-mux
> > or regulator-fixed etc etc. Unless you thought that I was saying that
> > "spidev" should be a compatible? Definitely was not suggesting that!
> 
> It sounded like you were suggesting using spidev, yes.

Ah ye no, not at all. Francesco suggested using "linux,spi-miso-mosi-loopback"
and it was that I think the "linux," should be culled from.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]