On 25/06/2019 11:55:33+0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:31:56AM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > On 25/06/2019 09:14:13+0000, Eugen.Hristev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > Perhaps > > > > > > > > microchip,digital-filter; > > > > microchip,analog-filter; > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > Thanks for reviewing. The name of the property does not matter much to > > > me, and we have properties prefixed with vendor, and some are not. > > > > > > @Alexandre Belloni: which name you think it's best ? > > > > > > > I'm not sure, it depends on whether Wolfram thinks it is generic enough > > to be used without a vendor prefix. > > I could imagine that we design a generic property for filters. The ones > above make me wonder, though, because they are bool. I'd think you can > configure the filters in some way, too? > Apart from enabling the filter there is indeed one configuration setting, the maximum pulse width of spikes to be suppressed by the input filter. > I never used such filtering, so I am unaware of the parameters needed / > suitable. Quick grepping through I2C master drivers reveals that > i2c-stm32f7.c also handles filters, but only with default values. Maybe > DT configuration would be benefitial to that driver, too? > > Adding some people to CC. > -- Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
