Hi Doug, On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 10:58:07AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 7:37 PM Charles Wang <charles.goodix@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > + goodix,hid-report-addr: > > > > > > I do not see this patch addressing previous review. Sending something > > > like this as v1 after long discussions also does not help. > > > > > > No, you keep sending the same and the same, without improvements. > > > > > > > I apologize for overlooking the discussions regarding this issue. > > > > I would like to clarify that while the current boards use the same address, > > but newly designed boards in the future may require different addresses. > > > > Retaining this property would likely offer more flexibility. > > I don't feel very strongly about it, but maybe Krzysztof does? > Possibly the path of least resistance would be: > > 1. You drop the property from the bindings. > > 2. You hardcode it in the driver to be the normal value. > > 3. If/when someone actually needs a different value then we can add it > as an optional property in the bindings and fall back to the default > value if the property isn't present. > > What do you think? If you feel strongly about keeping the > "hid-report-addr" then you can certainly keep making your case. > However, it's probably best to wait to get agreement from Krzysztof > (or one of the other DT maintainers) before sending your next version > unless you're going to take the "path of least resistance" that I talk > about above. > Agreed, let's wait and see the opinions of Krzysztof (or the other DT maintainers). Thanks, Charles
