IRQ_TYPE_xxx flags are not correct in the context of GPIO flags.
These are simple defines so they could be used in DTS but they will not
have the same meaning: IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING = 1 = GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW.

Correct the example DTS to use proper flags for chip select GPIOs,
assuming the author of the code wanted similar logical behavior:

  IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING => GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl,spi.yaml | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl,spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl,spi.yaml
index d74792fc9bf2..6a359488dd41 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl,spi.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/fsl,spi.yaml
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ unevaluatedProperties: false
 
 examples:
   - |
-    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
+    #include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
 
     spi@4c0 {
         compatible = "fsl,spi";
@@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ examples:
         cell-index = <0>;
         interrupts = <82 0>;
         mode = "cpu";
-        cs-gpios = <&gpio 18 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING          // device reg=<0>
-                    &gpio 19 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;        // device reg=<1>
+        cs-gpios = <&gpio 18 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>,        // device reg=<0>
+                   <&gpio 19 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;        // device reg=<1>
     };
 
 ...
-- 
2.51.0

On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 10:59:48 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> spi: dt-bindings: fsl: Correct GPIO flags in the example

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-7.1

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: dt-bindings: fsl: Correct GPIO flags in the example
      https://git.kernel.org/broonie/spi/c/ebeef57b7ba9

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark