Re: (subset) [PATCH v1 0/3] spidev: introduce trivial abb sensor device

On 7/21/25 21:05, Heiko Schocher wrote:

Hello Krzysztof,

On 21.07.25 18:24, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 21/07/2025 17:56, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 08:33:51 +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:

quoted

This series introduces the changes needed for trivial spi
based sensors from ABB, currently operated from userspace.

The last patch adds the spidevices to the DTS files, already
in mainline.

make dtbs_check showed no errors/warnings for the dts files

[...]

Applied to

    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/3] dt-bindings: trivial-devices: Document ABB sensors
       commit: aad2f87cbcab56b322109d26d7b11842a09df91f
[2/3] spi: spidev: Add an entry for the ABB spi sensors
       commit: d60f7cab7c04944a79af16caa43c141e780a59c6

That's unexpected, Mark. Patches received two objections/comments and I
don't think discussion was resolved.

ABB is huge company, probably making hundreds or more of sensors. The
patchset basically claims that all of them work with spidev. It does not
providing any model names or details, so it seems really incomplete to
call them trivial devices.

I do not know how many different sensors they have, nor if that department can
speak for the whole company...

What I have as information is:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/2477dc64-92a0-9dc9-d168-56646d0d796e@denx.de/ (local)

and I get no more information about them currently. May I should
add some sort of trivial into compatible name? Something like

"abb,spi-trivial-sensor"
or
"abb,spidev-trivial-sensor"

which makes it clearer, that only ABB trivial sensor, controlled through spidev
driver, is connected here?

FWIW, I always thought that devicetree is not supposed to contain such generic
information. Is it even appropriate to list something like this in devicetree
in the first place ?

If so, what prevents anyone from submitting hundreds of
"<company>,spidev-trivial-<device-type>" entries, using the same line of argument ?

Guenter