Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: spi: Add separate binding for dh,dhcom-board

[Marek Vasut <marex@nabladev.com>]

On 10/20/26 3:33 PM, Christoph Niedermaier wrote:

Hello Christoph,

[...]

>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/dh,dhcom-board.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
>>>>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
>>>>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>>>>> +---
>>>>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/spi/dh,dhcom-board.yaml#
>>>>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +title: DH electronics GmbH on-board CPLD trivial SPI device
>>>>>
>>>>> This does not look quite right, since compatible this is used only on:
>>>>>
>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6ull-dhcor-maveo-box.dts
>>>>>
>>>>>          model = "DH electronics i.MX6ULL DHCOR on maveo box";
>>>>>          compatible = "marantec,imx6ull-dhcor-maveo-box",
>>>>> "dh,imx6ull-dhcor-som",
>>>>>
>>>>> So the whole
>>>>>
>>>>>          spidev@0 {
>>>>>                  compatible = "dh,dhcom-board";
>>>>>                  reg = <0>;
>>>>>                  spi-cpha;
>>>>>                  spi-cpol;
>>>>>                  spi-max-frequency = <54000000>;
>>>>>          };
>>>>>
>>>>> Should probably use a different compatible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Christoph, what device is this on this board ?
> 
> There is no device connected to these pins, only an extension connector.
> The "dh,dhcom-board" device was used only to test the hardware and was
> unfortunately forgotten to be removed. In the production version, no
> device is connected to this interface. It should actually be removed.
> Should I create a patch for this?

In that case, I would suggest to remove this whole spidev@0 from this DT 
with proper Fixes: tag .

[...]

>>> But in any case, the compatible string should likely be fixed here, this
>>> does not seem right. The dh,dhcom-board was describing some CPLD/FPGA on one
>>> of the evalboards.
>>
>> Ye I don't disagree there. "dhcom-board" seems not nearly specific
>> enough about what the device is.
> 
> There isn't actually a user for this device, see above. It's only used downstream
> at DH electronics for a connection to a PSoC chip. But even for this purpose, it's
> not being used correctly. What should we do now?
I think this patch can also be dropped, the dh,dhcom-board would be left 
as a legacy compatible for the CPLD/FPGA on the DHCOM PDK2 board (where 
it is not described yet, but should be) , and the dh-dhcom-board should 
remain a trivial device, since the CPLD/FPGA is connected via some 
parallel bus if I recall it right ?