[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aaa12002-3922-428c-b595-2cad76e9ce2e@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:10:10 +0000
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Ivaylo Ivanov <ivo.ivanov.ivanov1@...il.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>,
Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: soc: samsung: usi: replace USI_V2 in
constants with USI_MODE
On 1/6/25 8:50 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/01/2025 08:41, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote:
>> On 1/6/25 09:36, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>> Hiya,
>>>
>>> On 1/5/25 4:03 PM, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote:
>>>> +#define USI_MODE_NONE 0
>>>> +#define USI_MODE_UART 1
>>>> +#define USI_MODE_SPI 2
>>>> +#define USI_MODE_I2C 3
>>> USI_CONFIG register refers to the protocol selection with USI_I2C,
>>> USI_SPI, USI_UART. How about getting rid of the MODE from the name?
>>
>> I thought about that too but I believe that mentioning that these constants
>> are for mode selection in their name is generally a good practice. Let me know
>> if dropping _MODE is really needed.
no strong requirement.
> I am fine with both, MODE feels a bit more descriptive indicating how
> the USI should be configured.
Fine by me to keep MODE in the name.
Cheers,
ta
Powered by blists - more mailing lists