linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <VE1PR04MB6768E050B97AAA33501B6D6891540@VE1PR04MB6768.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Aug 2020 08:19:41 +0000
From:   Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
CC:     kuldip dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@...esoftware.com>,
        "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@....com>,
        Varun Sethi <V.Sethi@....com>,
        Tanveer Alam <tanveer.alam@...esoftware.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support



On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 19:25, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
> Sent: 2020年8月24日 19:25
> To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
> Cc: kuldip dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@...esoftware.com>;
> linux-spi@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Qiang Zhao
> <qiang.zhao@....com>; Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@....com>; Varun Sethi
> <V.Sethi@....com>; Tanveer Alam <tanveer.alam@...esoftware.com>
> 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