From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: at24: Add address-width property Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:41:35 +0300 Message-ID: <049fae0ebe5521d4bb92d7d0f66cd2a54a1a2d22.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <1530078385-1546-1-git-send-email-alanx.chiang@intel.com> <1530078385-1546-2-git-send-email-alanx.chiang@intel.com> <20180627094013.e42crqqufo2jqra6@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180627094013.e42crqqufo2jqra6@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sakari Ailus , Bartosz Golaszewski Cc: alanx.chiang@intel.com, linux-i2c , andy.yeh@intel.com, Rajmohan Mani , Andy Shevchenko , tfiga@chromium.org, jcliang@chromium.org, Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Kernel Mailing List , devicetree List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 12:40 +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:19:38AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > 2018-06-27 7:46 GMT+02:00 : > > > From: Alan Chiang > > > > > > The AT24 series chips use 8-bit address by default. If some > > > chips would like to support more than 8 bits, the at24 driver > > > should be added the compatible field for specfic chips. > > > > > > Provide a flexible way to determine the addressing bits through > > > address-width in this patch. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Chiang > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Yeh > > > > > > --- > > > since v1: > > > -- Remove the address-width field in the example. > > > since v2: > > > -- Remove redundant space. > > > > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > > index 61d833a..aededdb 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > > @@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ Optional properties: > > > > > > - wp-gpios: GPIO to which the write-protect pin of the chip is > > > connected. > > > > > > + - address-width: number of address bits (one of 8, 16). > > > + > > > Example: > > > > > > eeprom@52 { > > > -- > > > 2.7.4 > > > > > > > Rob, > > > > we only have two possibilities here and the default is 8 bits. > > > > What do you think about introducing a boolean property here called: > > 'address-width-16' instead of an integer? > > I'd have thought the same, but it turns out address-width is already > being > used by the at25 bindings: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at25.txt > Agree with Sakari, there is no need to evolve a chaos in DT bindings. We have too many semi-hemi-duplications in bindings. Especially in this case we have already established property by a similar driver. -- Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy