[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250918140633-GYA1274501@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 22:06:33 +0800
From: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>
To: Alex Elder <elder@...cstar.com>
Cc: broonie@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
palmer@...belt.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu, alex@...ti.fr,
p.zabel@...gutronix.de, spacemit@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] riscv: dts: spacemit: define a SPI controller node
Hi Alex,
On 08:51 Thu 18 Sep , Alex Elder wrote:
> On 9/18/25 8:32 AM, Yixun Lan wrote:
> >> + spi3: spi@...1c000 {
> >> + compatible = "spacemit,k1-spi";
> >> + reg = <0x0 0xd401c000 0x0 0x30>;
> >> + #address-cells = <1>;
> >> + #size-cells = <0>;
> >> + clocks = <&syscon_apbc CLK_SSP3>,
> >> + <&syscon_apbc CLK_SSP3_BUS>;
> > ..
> >> + clock-names = "core",
> >> + "bus";
> > can you simply put them together in one line? it's kind of tedious to split..
>
> Sure I can do that. I've seen it both ways.
>
right, it's merely a coding style I want to enforce, to make it slightly consistent
> >> + resets = <&syscon_apbc RESET_SSP3>;
> >> + interrupts-extended = <&plic 55>;
> > why use interrupts-extended?
>
> Because it specifies both the controller and interrupt number
> explicitly. Why *not* use interrupts-extended?
>
It's just unnecessary, the SPI node will fall back to find parent node's interrupt
which already specific as &plic, brings no benefits
> >> + spacemit,k1-ssp-id = <3>;
> >> + dmas = <&pdma 20>,
> >> + <&pdma 19>;
--
Yixun Lan (dlan)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists