Re: [PATCH v11 1/2] dt-bindings: spi: add loongson spi

[Conor Dooley]

On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 05:44:38PM +0800, zhuyinbo wrote:
> 
> 
> 在 2023/5/24 下午4:56, Conor Dooley 写道:
> > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 03:10:29PM +0800, Yinbo Zhu wrote:
> > > Add the Loongson platform spi binding with DT schema format using
> > > json-schema.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Yinbo Zhu <zhuyinbo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   .../bindings/spi/loongson,ls2k-spi.yaml       | 41 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >   MAINTAINERS                                   |  6 +++
> > >   2 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
> > >   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/loongson,ls2k-spi.yaml
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/loongson,ls2k-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/loongson,ls2k-spi.yaml
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..d0be6e5378d7
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/loongson,ls2k-spi.yaml
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
> > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > +---
> > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/spi/loongson,ls2k-spi.yaml#
> > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > > +
> > > +title: Loongson SPI controller
> > > +
> > > +maintainers:
> > > +  - Yinbo Zhu <zhuyinbo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > +
> > > +allOf:
> > > +  - $ref: /schemas/spi/spi-controller.yaml#
> > > +
> > > +properties:
> > > +  compatible:
> > > +    enum:
> > > +      - loongson,ls2k-spi
> > 
> > I am sorry to jump in here at such a late stage with a (potentially)
> > trivial question. "ls2k" is the SoC family rather than a specific model
> > as far as I understand.
> > The answer is probably yes, but do all SoCs in the family have an
> > identical version of the IP?
> 
> 
> No, but the spi supported by this loongson spi driver are all the same
> identical version, and other type or verion spi will be supported as
> needed in the future.

Does having a catch-all compatible make sense then when not all SoCs in
the ls2k family will actually be able to use this driver?
Or am I misunderstanding and all ls2k SoCs do work with this driver and
you were talking about other, future products?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature