Hi Rob,
Thanks for taking the time review the patches.
.../bindings/fpga/lattice-ice40-fpga-mgr.txt | 23 +++
It's preferred that bindings are a separate patch.
Can you just clarify a little? I'm happy to split the patch up, but I
don't understand how it could work without the bindings. For example, in
ice40_fpga_probe, I have to get the GPIOs with devm_gpiod_get for the
driver to work.
Maybe I'm missing something. Or do you just mean the documentation?
-gpios is preferred.
Please state direction and polarity.
Thanks, I'll fix that up.
+- creset_b-gpio: GPIO connected to CRESET_B pin. Note that CRESET_B is
Don't use '_'. In this case, I'd just do cresetb-gpios.
So the pin is called CRESET_B in the datasheet. I think the _B refers to
the active-low polarity of the line.
So I would think it should be creset-b-gpios or creset-gpios. I'm not so
convinced cresetb-gpios is ideal, but it's a minor point.
+ treated as an active-low output because the signal is
+ treated as an enable signal, rather than a reset. This
Though for enable signals, enable-gpios is fairly standard even if that
deviates from the pin name.
I would think that would just confuse the user, unless they dig out the
binding docs. The FPGA doesn't have an enable pin, and it's not at all
obvious that a "reset" pin means "enable" in this driver.
Again, if you're adamant this is the correct convention it's no problem
to make the change - just seems weird to me. What do you think?
Thanks
Joel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
