[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cb7c3e0d-07c4-fab3-8e44-8716f8faf1bb@microchip.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2022 13:42:40 +0000
From: <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
To: <Sergiu.Moga@...rochip.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
<Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>, <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
<Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com>
CC: <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <Kavyasree.Kotagiri@...rochip.com>,
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] spi: atmel: convert spi_atmel to json-schema
On 7/4/22 16:24, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
> On 7/4/22 11:31, Sergiu Moga wrote:
>> + atmel,fifo-size:
>> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>> + description: |
>> + Maximum number of data the RX and TX FIFOs can store for FIFO
>> + capable SPI controllers.
>> + minimum: 16
>> + maximum: 32
>
> Shouldn't we have an enum instead of a range? Can the FIFO size have a value of 24?
I looked into the driver, when max is 32, one can set 24 for example.
I expect it will work, as the FIFO can handle data that is not multiple with
the FIFO size.
But I can't think of reasons why one would use a smaller FIFO size, so I lean
towards making this an enum instead of a range.
Cheers,
ta
Powered by blists - more mailing lists