[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGngYiXOkbQNgPcw9dk33VJiTe4jEjBUEC83vwVds+2Gd_O5Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 08:26:46 -0500
From: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>,
"H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>, kernel@...a-handheld.com,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: dt-bindings: clarify CS behavior for spi-cs-high and
gpio descriptors
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 8:18 AM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Yeah, it'd definitely be easier to read and clearer what people should
> actually do.
I think it would be beneficial if this consisted of two very clearly
separated parts:
1. the actual recommended binding - so people writing new
devicetrees know what to do
2. the legacy bindings which "also work", which is important
to know when working with legacy devicetrees
At least, that's what I would want if I put myself in a user's
shoes.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists