On 1/6/25 8:50 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 06/01/2025 08:41, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote: >> On 1/6/25 09:36, Tudor Ambarus wrote: >>> Hiya, >>> >>> On 1/5/25 4:03 PM, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote: >>>> +#define USI_MODE_NONE 0 >>>> +#define USI_MODE_UART 1 >>>> +#define USI_MODE_SPI 2 >>>> +#define USI_MODE_I2C 3 >>> USI_CONFIG register refers to the protocol selection with USI_I2C, >>> USI_SPI, USI_UART. How about getting rid of the MODE from the name? >> >> I thought about that too but I believe that mentioning that these constants >> are for mode selection in their name is generally a good practice. Let me know >> if dropping _MODE is really needed. no strong requirement. > I am fine with both, MODE feels a bit more descriptive indicating how > the USI should be configured. Fine by me to keep MODE in the name. Cheers, ta
