On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 09:07:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 01:46:35PM +0100, Francesco Valla wrote: > > Hello Michael, > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 06:50:51AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 08:26:32AM +0100, Francesco Valla wrote: > > > > When a virtio transport exposes a non-discoverable bus, the devicetree > > > > can be used to declare its child devices (if any) and/or other > > > > properties. To allow for that, the virtio framework searches for a node > > > > with a suitable compatible in virtio_device_of_init() when registering > > > > a device [1]; such compatible takes the form "virtio,deviceXX", where > > > > XX is the hexadecimal representation of the virtio device ID as defined > > > > by the virtio specification. > > > > > > > > This patchset thus does not introduce a new functionality, but allows > > > > proper validation of nodes tied to spi-virtio devices, aligning SPI to > > > > what is already being done for e.g. I2C and GPIO virtio devices. > > > > It was sent initially as part of a different patchset [2], but since it > > > > complements a functionality that is de-facto already there and is useful > > > > beyond that specific use case it was sent separately (also following the > > > > maintainer's feedback there to separate it from remoteproc-specific > > > > changes). > > > > > > > > This was tested both with virtio-mmio using qemu-system-aarch64 and with > > > > remoteproc-virtio with a Zephyr backend (with relevant remoteproc-virtio > > > > parts still not not upstreamed - see [2]). > > > > > > > > I added myself as reviewer for the spi-virtio driver to be CC'd on any > > > > patch involving the new bindings. > > > > > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Francesco > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.2.8/source/drivers/virtio/virtio.c#L488 > > > > [2] > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-remoteproc/[email protected]/ > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Francesco Valla <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > > > I hope this can be merged through the devicetree maintainers, > > > I have no idea. > > > MAINTAINERS changes needs an ack from existing maintainers, of > > > course. > > > > > > > This might prove... difficult. My e-mails to the maintainer (Haixu Cui > > @quicinc.com) continue to be bounced back by the Qualcomm postmaster > > with a RecipientNotFound error. Maybe someone from Qualcomm can give me > > a lead on how to contact them? > > Indeed, so it did for me. Oh that's no good at all. > > Mark, what's your take? The maintainer is MIA but we have a volunteer > maintainer here. > > As far as I'm concerned > > Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>
All @quicinc.com emails stopped working long time ago and Qualcomm engineers were asked to update their emails. Most did the update, so if nothing happened here, let's make it orphaned and then Francesco can take it over. Best regards, Krzysztof
