From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jae Hyun Yoo Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] [PATCH 2/8] Documentations: dt-bindings: Add a document of PECI adapter driver for Aspeed AST24xx/25xx SoCs Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 15:47:01 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20180307221124.GD10438@amd> <20180221161606.32247-1-jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com> <20180221161606.32247-3-jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com> <20180306124002.GA13950@amd> <33bf6563-b220-7ff9-8b04-84e9bd781b3f@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Milton Miller II , Pavel Machek Cc: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, andrew@lunn.ch, jdelvare@suse.com, arnd@arndb.de, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, andrew@aj.id.au, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux@roeck-us.net, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Milton, Thanks for sharing your time to review this patch. Please see my answer inline. Jae On 3/9/2018 3:41 PM, Milton Miller II wrote: > About 03/07/2018 04:12PM in some time zone, Pavel Machek wrote: >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] [PATCH 2/8] Documentations: dt-bindings: >> Add a document of PECI adapter driver for Aspeed AST24xx/25xx SoCs >> >> Hi! >> >>>> Are these SoCs x86-based? >>> >>> Yes, these are ARM SoCs. Please see Andrew's answer as well. >> >> Understood, thanks. >> >>>>> + Read sampling point selection. The whole period of a bit time >> will be >>>>> + divided into 16 time frames. This value will determine which >> time frame >>>>> + this controller will sample PECI signal for data read back. >> Usually in >>>>> + the middle of a bit time is the best. >>>> >>>> English? "This value will determine when this controller"? >>>> >>> >>> Could I change it like below?: >>> >>> "This value will determine in which time frame this controller >> samples PECI >>> signal for data read back" >> >> I guess... I'm not native speaker, I guess this could be improved >> some >> more. >> > > I agree this wording is still confusing. > > The problem is that the key subject, the time of the sampling, is in the descriptive clause "in which time frame". > > "This value will determine the time frame in which the controller will sample" > > or perhaps phrase it as saving a specific sample from the over-clock, or a phase of the clock. > Yes, that looks more better. I'll change the wording as you suggested. Thanks a lot! Jae >> Best regards, >> Pavel >> >> -- >> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek >> (cesky, pictures) >> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html >> > > milton > -- > Speaking for myself not IBM. >