[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y9EXNmgMR1uHTgX4@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 13:49:10 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Martin Zaťovič <m.zatovic1@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
mani@...nel.org, hemantk@...eaurora.org, quic_jhugo@...cinc.com,
andersson@...nel.org, Michael.Srba@...nam.cz, arnd@...db.de,
dipenp@...dia.com, bvanassche@....org, iwona.winiarska@...el.com,
ogabbay@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de, fmdefrancesco@...il.com,
jason.m.bills@...ux.intel.com, jae.hyun.yoo@...ux.intel.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
robh+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] wiegand: add Wiegand GPIO bit-banged controller
driver
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:28:55AM +0100, Martin Zaťovič wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> thank you for the notes, I am working on fixing them. You have
> mentioned, that it seems like the driver which should be generic
> provides specific functionality. AFAIK, the Wiegand protocol
> does not define the payload length of messages. Most devices use
> one of the three formats I have implemented - 26, 36 and
> 37-bits. If I understand you right, the Wiegand GPIO bit-banged
> driver should allow one to send messages of any length and it
> will be up to a device driver to make sure the correct message
> length is used. Is this the correct approach?
Yes. But it's up to you to come with a final design. I don't
know your hardware nor protocol, so I might be mistaken. Hence,
try different approaches and look which one is better looking /
maintainable / etc.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists