Re: [PATCH v8 05/10] dt-bindings: sc16is7xx: Add property to change GPIO function

On 07/06/2023 16:52, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:

On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 16:46:56 +0200
Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 07/06/2023 16:41, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 16:30:26 +0200
Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 07/06/2023 16:05, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:

quoted

From: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com>

Some variants in this series of UART controllers have GPIO pins that
are shared between GPIO and modem control lines.

The pin mux mode (GPIO or modem control lines) can be set for each
ports (channels) supported by the variant.

This adds a property to the device tree to set the GPIO pin mux to
modem control lines on selected ports if needed.

Cc: <redacted> # 6.1.x
Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com>
Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Reviewed-by: Lech Perczak <redacted>
---
 .../bindings/serial/nxp,sc16is7xx.txt         | 46 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/nxp,sc16is7xx.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/nxp,sc16is7xx.txt
index 0fa8e3e43bf8..1a7e4bff0456 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/nxp,sc16is7xx.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/nxp,sc16is7xx.txt

@@ -23,6 +23,9 @@ Optional properties:
     1 = active low.
 - irda-mode-ports: An array that lists the indices of the port that
 		   should operate in IrDA mode.
+- nxp,modem-control-line-ports: An array that lists the indices of the port that
+				should have shared GPIO lines configured as
+				modem control lines.
 
 Example:
         sc16is750: sc16is750@51 {

@@ -35,6 +38,26 @@ Example:
                 #gpio-cells = <2>;
         };
 
+	sc16is752: sc16is752@53 {

Since you keep sending new versions, fix the names. nNode names should
be generic. See also explanation and list of examples in DT specification:
https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation

Hi,
by the way, I do not "keep sending new versions" just for the fun of
it...

Sure, I know. So when the next version is necessary to send, fix also this.

quoted

Even after reading your link, I cannot see what is wrong with that
name.

They are not generic. They are specific.

What do you mean by "They"? My patch adds only a new property...

Your patch adds multiple new examples. My comment was at appropriate
place to fix, although only the first place. I did not refer to
unrelated pieces or other parts of the code. Specifically - I wrote
nothing about property.

This patch will not fix old names, but a future patch could do it.

No worries, I asked for new code.

And what do you mean by "They are not generic. They are specific". Of
course the property is specific, because it relates to something very
specific to this chip?

Again, I did not comment under a property. I did not refer to any property.


Best regards,
Krzysztof