Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: renesas: sparrow-hawk: Add overlay for WaveShare 2CH CANFD HAT

From: Marek Vasut

Date: Wed Sep 09 2026 - 11:39:24 EST


On 9/9/26 9:56 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

Hello Geert,

On Tue, 8 Sept 2026 at 19:02, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9/8/26 2:02 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
+&pfc {
+ msiof0_pins: spi-ws-2ch-canfd0 { /* SPI_0 */

Node name should be "msiof0".

Do we also have to fix up
arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a779g3-sparrow-hawk.dts this:

"
755 msiof1_pins: sound {
^^^^^
"
?

Might be a good idea, to increase consistency.

Submitted as

[PATCH] arm64: dts: renesas: sparrow-hawk: Align MSIOF1 PFC node name with label

But I wonder, shouldn't the DTOs contain unique pinmux node names, which
cannot accidentally overlap with the base DT or other DTO node names ?

In general, the answer is yes.
In this case it is about pin control subnodes. If the base DTS already
uses msiof0, its original user needs to be disabled by the overlay
anyway.

The original DTS does not use MSIOF0 .

I think the proper solution here would be DT connector ?

+ groups = "msiof0_clk", "msiof0_txd", "msiof0_rxd";
+ function = "msiof0";
+ };
+};
+
+/*
+ * PWM1 uses PWM1_B pin configuration for pin GP2_13. This conflicts
+ * with SPI_1 CE_1 signal which is also on pin GP2_13. Disable PWM1
+ * in case this hat is in use.
+ */
+&pwm1 {
+ status = "disabled";
+};

Please move this node disabling pwm1 to the top, for compatibility
with dynamic DT overlays.
Could you expand on that a bit ? What difference does the placement of
this node make within the DTSO ? Please pardon my ignorance.

In case of a dynamic overlay, pwm1 must be disabled before SPI_1 is
probed. Otherwise the latter will fail with -EBUSY due to the
conflicting pin being still in use.

TIL, thank you.

--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut