[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e673dbdf-9b16-4c64-a3e0-cf5bb31e2b82@quicinc.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:21:41 +0530
From: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <quic_kathirav@...cinc.com>
To: Manikanta Mylavarapu <quic_mmanikan@...cinc.com>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
<linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
<mturquette@...libre.com>, <sboyd@...nel.org>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <quic_varada@...cinc.com>, <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Add SPI4 support for IPQ5424
On 12/27/2024 12:54 PM, Manikanta Mylavarapu wrote:
> Add SPI4 node to the IPQ5424 device tree and update the relevant
> bindings, GPIO pin mappings accordingly.
>
> Changes in V3:
> - Rename SPI0 to SPI4 because SPI protocol runs on serial engine 4
Do we really need to do this? If so, it will not align with the HW
documentation and will lead to the confusion down the line. IMHO, we
should stick with the convention followed in the HW documentation.
Thanks,
Kathiravan T.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists