[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170623081726.GA1526@katana>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:17:26 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc: "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: add bindings for i2c-pca-platform
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 09:20:59PM +0000, Chris Packham wrote:
> On 22/06/17 20:23, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >
> >> + - reset-gpios : gpio specifier for gpio connected to RESET_N pin.
> >
> > What about the 'active' state that Rob mentioned in his last review?
> >
>
> My intention was that by saying it is connected to the RESET_N bin the
> active state is covered.
>
> I personally always get a little confused when talking about reset
> lines. The _N denotes that the line is active low but because it is a
> reset line writing 1 releases the reset so from a what-the-user-wants
> perspective it's active high.
>
> dt-binding-wise what we want here is GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH, as in the driver
> writes 1 to release reset so don't do any polarity inversion. I'd be
> happy do add something to that effect in a v3 but I actually felt saying
> the gpio is connected to RESET_N was less ambiguous.
Okay. Thanks for the explanation. I am fine with it but I'll leave the
final decision to Rob.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists