[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0826a055f6b2e3e6b50a5961e60d1b57d1d596c6.camel@foss.st.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 17:09:14 +0200
From: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@...s.st.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Maxime Coquelin
<mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Christophe Roullier
<christophe.roullier@...s.st.com>,
Fabien Dessenne
<fabien.dessenne@...s.st.com>,
Valentin Caron <valentin.caron@...s.st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/10] dt-bindings: pinctrl: stm32: Support I/O
synchronization parameters
On Wed, 2025-10-15 at 15:35 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 02:56:56PM +0200, Antonio Borneo wrote:
> > On Tue, 2025-10-14 at 19:10 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 04:04:50PM +0200, Antonio Borneo wrote:
>
> > >
> > > > +
> > > > + st,io-sync:
> > > > + description: |
> > > > + IO synchronization through re-sampling or inversion
> > > > + 0: data or clock GPIO pass-through
> > > > + 1: clock GPIO inverted
> > > > + 2: data GPIO re-sampled on clock rising edge
> > > > + 3: data GPIO re-sampled on clock falling edge
> > > > + 4: data GPIO re-sampled on both clock edges
> > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> > > > + enum: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
> > >
> > > I really don't like this kinds of properties that lead to "random"
> > > numbers in devicetree. I'd much rather see a string list here.
> >
> > Agree!
> > I just need to figure out some reasonably short but still meaningful
> > string for them.
>
> pass-through
> inverted
> rising-edge
> falling-edge
> both-edges
>
> perhaps?
Since these are strings in a custom property, I think I will use something longer and more explicit for them.
Linus,
pinconf-generic only accepts positive numeric values for both generic and custom properties in struct pinconf_generic_params.
Plus, I haven't found any existing driver that mixes pinconf-generic with custom string values.
I'm going to extend the current pinconf-generic to handle such case.
Or did I missed something?
Regards,
Antonio
Powered by blists - more mailing lists