On Wed, 2021-08-11 at 08:06 +0000, Joakim Zhang wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@xxxxxxx> > > Sent: 2021年8月11日 16:05 > > To: Jan Lübbe <jlu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx; > > robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: RE: [PATCH V1 1/4] bindings: nvmem: introduce "reverse-data" > > property > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jan Lübbe <jlu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: 2021年8月10日 23:14 > > > To: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@xxxxxxx>; > > > srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; > > > shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx > > > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; > > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 1/4] bindings: nvmem: introduce "reverse-data" > > > property > > > > > > On Tue, 2021-08-10 at 15:35 +0800, Joakim Zhang wrote: > > > > Introduce "reverse-data" property for nvmem provider to reverse buffer. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@xxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml | 5 +++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml > > > > index b8dc3d2b6e92..bc745083fc64 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml > > > > @@ -61,6 +61,11 @@ patternProperties: > > > > description: > > > > Size in bit within the address range specified by reg. > > > > > > > > + reverse-data: > > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag > > > > + description: > > > > + Reverse the data that read from the storage device. > > > > > > I'd prefer if it was more explicit that the *bytes* will be reversed. > > > Otherwise a reader might think that this is reversing on the *bit* level. > > > > Make sense, how about 'reverse-byte-order'? > > Sorry, 'reverse-bytes-order'. 'reverse-byte-order' sounds better to me, but I'm not a native English speaker. I'd be fine with either, though. Thanks Jan
