Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt-bindings: gpio: Add devicetree binding for IDT 79RC32434 GPIO controller

[Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 02:13:35PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:54 AM Thomas Bogendoerfer
> <tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Add YAML devicetree binding for IDT 79RC32434 GPIO controller
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes in v4:
> >  - renamed to idt,32434-gpio this time for real
> 
> Overall looks good to me.
> 
> > +required:
> (...)
> > +  - ngpios
> 
> Is there a *technical* reason why this is required?
> 
> Can't the driver just default to 32 gpios when not specified?

sure, I make it optional.

> > +  - interrupt-controller
> > +  - "#interrupt-cells"
> > +  - interrupts
> 
> Why can't interrupt support be made optional?
> 
> It is fine if the driver errors out if not provided, but
> for the bindings this feels optional.

I'll make them optional.

> Or does the thing break unless you handle the IRQs?

no, they could be used just as GPIOs.

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]