Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mtd: spi-nor: clarify the need for spi-nor compatibles

[Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>]

Hi, Miquel,

On 6/16/23 15:00, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Most SPI NOR devices do not require a specific compatible, their ID can
> in general be discovered with the JEDEC READ ID opcode. In this case,
> only the "jedec,spi-nor" generic compatible is expected. Clarify this
> information in the compatible description to (i) help device-tree
> writers and (ii) prevent further attempts to extend this list with
> useless information.

Sounds good. If you don't mind I'll reword the description from below
when applying.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml
> index 7149784a36ac..bef071163e38 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml
> @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ properties:
>            - const: jedec,spi-nor
>        - const: jedec,spi-nor
>      description:
> -      Must also include "jedec,spi-nor" for any SPI NOR flash that can be
> -      identified by the JEDEC READ ID opcode (0x9F).
> +      SPI NOR flashes compatible with the JEDEC standard or which may be

s/JEDEC/JEDEC216, s/may/can

> +      identified with the JEDEC READ ID opcode (0x9F) do not deserve a

"deserve" is a little harsh. How about "must be matched against
the generic ...".

For future me: 0x9f is not a JEDEC216 opcode, it just happened
that the industry agreed on a specific opcode for reading the
ID of the flash. JEDEC216 doesn't care about the flash's ID.
We care because of the fixup hooks.

Cheers,
ta
> +      specific compatible. They should instead only be matched against
> +      the generic "jedec,spi-nor" compatible.
>  
>    reg:
>      minItems: 1