On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 09:05, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 10:04:24PM +0100, Emil Renner Berthing wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 21:29, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 10:40 AM Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > ... > > > No, I agree. I think it's only that Andy wasn't sure if these interim > > states might be meaningful/useful. > > Exactly. Because HW could behave differently. Right. But I think we've now established that what is described in the device tree is the state the pins should be in after the function has been called, eg. only the reduction matters, and any interim states would just be a byproduct of storing the state in the configs list. > > > And if it is possible > > > to write DTS files that have states and sequence requirements, > > > these should be caught in validation. Should be. > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-riscv mailing list > linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
