linux-kernel - Re: (subset) [PATCH v3 0/3] spi: xilinx: switch to device properties and make IRQs optional

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <8270c11f-7244-478e-b341-2ae7f6e1e416@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 13:26:04 +0100
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Abdurrahman Hussain <abdurrahman@...thop.ai>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH v3 0/3] spi: xilinx: switch to device properties
 and make IRQs optional



On 1/21/26 12:39, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 09:15:02AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On 1/20/26 20:23, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>>> [1/3] spi: dt-bindings: xilinx: make interrupts optional
>>>         commit: b603500de20fbe15ee54580481c1df4212a4ec44
> 
>> Are you sure about this one based on my discussion with Rob in past?
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250605130331.GA2370690-robh@kernel.org/
> 
>> I don't really mind but would be good to do it in a consistent way.
> 
> My understanding was that the hardware doesn't require physically wiring
> up the interrupt signal and can work in a polling only mode.  That's not
> unknown for SPI controllers.  If the interrupt is actually a strong
> requirement for the hardware (and especially if it is actually wired up
> on this system) then we should drop these patches.

Keep in mind one thing. This is soft IP in fpga. If you connect in design IRQ 
you will have it. If you don't connect it, you don't have it.
 From HW perspective both of them are valid options.

It is up to everybody to decide if make sense to have IRQ logic or not.

This is the same for all soft IP cores which Xilinx is having.

 From SW perspective one OS can decide to use IRQ, another one not.

Then the question is if DT binding in Linux are targeting HW capability and 
configurations or describing Linux driver. I was said multiple times that it 
should describe HW not actually what Linux driver implements.

Thanks,
Michal