[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGfWUPxLVzziWmwcfqDCfWuVM_Gjya4AzTmoqs1xTcGMXsRorA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:05:39 -0800
From: Aahil Awatramani <aahila@...gle.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: David Dillow <dillow@...gle.com>, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, Jan Dabros <jsd@...ihalf.com>,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: i2c: designware: allow fine tuning
tuning waveform from device tree
Thank you Andy and Krzysztof,
I think you are right and I can use the other DT counter, I am
currently trying to test if they work for me.
Best,
Aahil
On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 3:49 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 04:46:22AM +0000, Aahil Awatramani wrote:
> > The Synopsys i2c driver allows a user to override the parameters
> > controlling the waveform using ACPI; this is useful for fine tuning when
> > needed to make spec compliance. Extend this support to the device tree to
> > allow non-ACPI platforms the same capabilities.
>
> DT has different counters from which one should derive these ones.
> Can you explain why existing bindings may _not_ be utilised?
>
> Without this very justification, NAK.
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists