[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z2piHTP63SpaatHv@probook>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 07:26:21 +0000
From: J. Neuschäfer <j.ne@...teo.net>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: j.ne@...teo.net, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] gpio: 74x164: Add latch GPIO support
On Sun, Dec 22, 2024 at 09:58:39AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 6:32 PM J. Neuschäfer via B4 Relay
> <devnull+j.ne.posteo.net@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > From: "J. Neuschäfer" <j.ne@...teo.net>
> >
> > The Fairchild MM74HC595 and other compatible parts have a latch clock
> > input (also known as storage register clock input), which must be
> > clocked once in order to apply any value that was serially shifted in.
> >
> > This patch adds driver support for using a GPIO that connects to the
> > latch clock.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: J. Neuschäfer <j.ne@...teo.net>
>
> This looks completely reasonable to me as far as 2/4 gets merged:
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
I think I prefer the other option, of documenting that the latch clock
pin pretty much behaves as a chip select.
Having a separately described latch clock would mean no CS for these
chips, and the SPI bindings and drivers don't expect devices without CS.
-- jn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists