On 11/05/16 14:28, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> On Sunday 08 May 2016 05:43 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> On 06/05/16 16:32, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>> On Friday 06 May 2016 08:07 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>>> On 06/05/16 11:45, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Last entry */
>>>> + TEGRA_IO_PAD_MAX,
>>>> Nit should these be TEGRA_IO_PADS_xxx?
>>> Because this was name of single pad and hence I said TEGRA_IO_PAD_XXX.
>> Aren't these used to set the voltage level and power state for the
>> entire group of IOs? Confused :-(
>
> One IO pad can have multiple IO pins.
> IO Pad control the power state and voltage of all pins belongs to that
> IO pad.
Ugh ... I remember for xusb there was something similar we the Tegra
docs used pad to imply multiple. However, in general pad == pin == ball
or at least should.
> Now what should we say PADS or PAD here? TEGRA_IO_PAD_UART or
> TEGRA_IO_PADS_UART?
Personally, I think pads and that is purely because it aligns with the
APIs. I think that the APIs names, tegra_io_pads_xxx() should be
consistent with the enum naming.
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/* tegra_io_pads_source_voltage: The voltage level of IO rails which
>>>>> source
>>>>> + * the IO pads.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +enum tegra_io_pads_source_voltage {
>>>>> + TEGRA_IO_PADS_SOURCE_VOLTAGE_1800000UV,
>>>>> + TEGRA_IO_PADS_SOURCE_VOLTAGE_3300000UV,
>>>>> +};
>>>> Nit I wonder if we can make this shorter ...
>>>>
>>>> enum tegra_io_pads_vconf {
>>>> TEGRA_IO_PADS_VCONF_1V8,
>>>> TEGRA_IO_PADS_VCONF_3V3,
>>> This looks good but for voltage and current, unit is used uV/uV across
>>> the system. So wanted to have same unit.
>> Now it is an enum does it matter? Or maybe just have ...
>>
>> enum tegra_io_pads_vconf {
>> TEGRA_IO_PADS_1800000UV,
>> TEGRA_IO_PADS_3300000UV,
>> };
>>
>
> OK, TEGRA_IO_PADS_VCONF_1800000UV and TEGRA_IO_PADS_VCONF_3300000UV.
> Fine?
Fine :-)
Jon
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
