On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 19:25, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Brown <[email protected]> > Sent: 2020年8月24日 19:25 > To: Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]> > Cc: kuldip dwivedi <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; [email protected]; Qiang Zhao > <[email protected]>; Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]>; Varun Sethi > <[email protected]>; Tanveer Alam <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 06:21:18PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 07:37:25PM +0530, Kuldip Dwivedi wrote: > > > > > The whole point with the device property API is that it works with > > > > both DT and ACPI without needing separate parsing, though in this > > > > case I'm wondering why we'd need to specify this in an ACPI system > > > > at all? > > > > Understood. Will take care in v2 PATCH > > > IMO there is zero reason for the existence of the "spi-num-chipselects" > > property even for DT. We should deprecate it (start ignoring it in > > existing device tree deployments) and populate struct > > fsl_dspi_devtype_data with that info based on SoC compatible string. > > Yes, it's a legacy from bad board file conversions and shouldn't be used at > all.
I saw a lot of driver assign spi_controller -> num_chipselect directly, should we do like that? BR Qiang Zhao
