On 2/14/2019 6:16 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:06 PM Ray Jui <ray.jui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Rob, >> >> On 2/13/2019 1:16 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 03:15:49PM -0800, Ray Jui wrote: >>>> In prep for the introduction of polling mode into the driver, update the >>>> binding document to make the 'interrupts' property optional >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ray Jui <ray.jui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/i2c/brcm,iproc-i2c.txt | 10 +++++++--- >>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/brcm,iproc-i2c.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/brcm,iproc-i2c.txt >>>> index 81f982ccca31..d3a3620b1f06 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/brcm,iproc-i2c.txt >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/brcm,iproc-i2c.txt >>>> @@ -9,9 +9,6 @@ Required properties: >>>> Define the base and range of the I/O address space that contain the iProc >>>> I2C controller registers >>>> >>>> -- interrupts: >>>> - Should contain the I2C interrupt >>>> - >>>> - clock-frequency: >>>> This is the I2C bus clock. Need to be either 100000 or 400000 >>>> >>>> @@ -21,6 +18,13 @@ Required properties: >>>> - #size-cells: >>>> Always 0 >>>> >>>> +Optional properties: >>>> + >>>> +- interrupts: >>>> + Should contain the I2C interrupt. If unspecified, driver will fall back to >>>> + polling mode >>> >>> What determines when you want to use polling mode? I'm not sure DT >>> is the best way to control this unless it's really a property of >>> the h/w. Driver behavior is really outside the scope of the DT. u-boot >>> would use polling even if an interrupt is specified, for example. >>> >> It's tied to the particular revision of the I2C controller, i.e., the >> iProc NIC i2c controller does not have interrupt line wired. In this >> case, the behavior is determined by the DT compatible string of the >> iProc I2C device. I thought that it makes sense to now move the >> 'interrupts' property to be under "Optional" than "Required" which is >> basically what this change is. > > Okay, please put this detail into the commit msg. Will do! Thanks. > > Rob >
