On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 07:34:27AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 04:26:25PM GMT, Amit Sunil Dhamne wrote: > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > On 9/12/24 3:05 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 05:07:05PM GMT, Amit Sunil Dhamne wrote: > > > > This commit adds a new property "pd-timers" to enable setting of > > > > platform/board specific pd timer values for timers that have a range of > > > > acceptable values. > > > > > > > > Cc: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Signed-off-by: Amit Sunil Dhamne <amitsd@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > .../bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml | 23 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > include/dt-bindings/usb/pd.h | 8 +++++++ > > > > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml > > > > index fb216ce68bb3..9be4ed12f13c 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml > > > > @@ -253,6 +253,16 @@ properties: > > > > additionalProperties: false > > > > + pd-timers: > > > > + description: An array of u32 integers, where an even index (i) is the timer (referenced in > > > > + dt-bindings/usb/pd.h) and the odd index (i+1) is the timer value in ms (refer > > > > + "Table 6-68 Time Values" of "USB Power Delivery Specification Revision 3.0, Version 1.2 " for > > > > + the appropriate value). For certain timers the PD spec defines a range rather than a fixed > > > > + value. The timers may need to be tuned based on the platform. This dt property allows the user > > > > + to assign specific values based on the platform. If these values are not explicitly defined, > > > > + TCPM will use a valid default value for such timers. > > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array > > > Is it really necessary to use the array property? I think it's easier > > > and more logical to define corresponding individual properties, one per > > > the timer. > > > > Thanks for the review. The reason I did it this way was for > > convenience. If in the future someone else wants add a new timer, > > it'd be convenient to just add it as a new macro definition in pd.h > > rather than having to define a new property each time, especially > > if folks want to add more timers (scales better). > > There are 3 timers already and I am working to add a fourth in a > > follow up patch if the current RFC gets accepted. > > > > Please let me know what do you think? > > I'd leave the decision to DT maintainers, but in my opinion multiple > properties scale better. Having a single value per property is easier to > handle rather than changing the tagged array. I agree. And it avoids what looks like a made up number space with the defines. And note that an array of tuples is a matrix in DT defined types, not an array. Rob
