From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:25:47 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] i2c/gpio-i2c add: add DT support In-Reply-To: <20120207025624.GB15647@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <1328438337-21185-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> <20120206160907.GG10173@sirena.org.uk> <20120207025624.GB15647@game.jcrosoft.org> Message-ID: <20120207112547.GC3332@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 03:56:24AM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 16:09 Mon 06 Feb , Mark Brown wrote: > > > + - udelay: half clock cycle time in us (may depend on each platform) > > > + udelay = <2>; /* ~100 kHz */ > > Why not specify this in kHz and do the conversion in the driver? It > > seems a more intuitive thing to be specifying. I appreciate that the > > platform data used udelay but it seems an entirely unintuitive thing > > from a user point of view even if it's what the implementation wants. > because it's not accurate and on some platform you need to adapt it so we keep > the udelay Then you should clarify that in the documentation, it's not the cycle time but the delay between GPIO operations which isn't quite the same thing. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: