On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 03:38:43PM +0100, Stefan Christ wrote: > Hi, > > > > Yeah, that would be the obvious and plausible thing to do, but the driver in > > > the linux kernel does it this way and it's documented in the device tree > > > bindings. So I'm not sure if we can change the default behavior here. > > > > Yes, we can ;) > > > > The rationale behind this code may be: The reset duration is > > unreasonably high (>1s), so that it to a sane default (1ms). > > > > I suggest to drop the check completely. If someone ever starts barebox > > with an insanely high value (maybe he thought the value is in us) then > > he won't notice the mistake if barebox silently falls back to 1ms as > > duration. If instead barebox waits for multiple seconds then he will > > notice and it the device tree which is what we want. > > Ok. So what about printing a warn message that case? Then everybody should > notice. No, I don't think that's necessary. Such an overlong delay should be noticeable already and give the right hint. Let's save the binary space. > > When I send a v2 patch, should the description in the device tree binding be > updated, too? No, the bindings docs are directly taken from the kernel and changes will be lost the next I update them. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
