From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754178AbbJ0IMo (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 04:12:44 -0400
Received: from down.free-electrons.com ([37.187.137.238]:60105 "EHLO
	mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753877AbbJ0IMj (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 04:12:39 -0400
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 09:12:35 +0100
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>
Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>, <tony@atomide.com>,
        <dwmw2@infradead.org>, <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>,
        <javier@dowhile0.org>, <fcooper@ti.com>, <nsekhar@ti.com>,
        <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alex Smith <alex.smith@imgtec.com>,
        Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@imgtec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 18/27] mtd: nand: omap2: Implement NAND ready using
 gpiolib
Message-ID: <20151027091235.03dba8c5@bbrezillon>
In-Reply-To: <562F2FB6.7050806@ti.com>
References: <1442588029-13769-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com>
	<1442588029-13769-19-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com>
	<20151026204900.GI13239@google.com>
	<562F2FB6.7050806@ti.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.27; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Roger,

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 10:03:02 +0200
Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> wrote:

> On 26/10/15 22:49, Brian Norris wrote:
> > 
> > Others have been looking at using GPIOs for the ready/busy pin too. At a
> > minimum, we need an updated DT binding doc for this, since I see you're
> > adding this via device tree in a later patch (I don't see any DT binding
> > patch for this; but I could just be overlooking it). It'd also be great
> > if this support was moved to nand_dt_init() so other platforms can
> > benefit, but I won't require that.
> > 
> > Also, previous [0] proposers had suggested 'rb-gpios', not 'ready-gpio'
> > (the hardware docs typically call it 'rb' for ready/busy, FWIW). I don't
> > really care, but the name should be going into a doc, so we can choose
> > the same one everywhere.
> > 
> > EDIT: looks like the discussion was partly here [1] and it seems we're
> > landing on "rb-gpios" in the latest version [2]. Can we stick with that?
> 
> Why should it be "rb-gpios" and not "rb-gpio"?
> I don't think there are multiple gpios for r/b# function.

Because it's supposed to be a generic binding, and some NAND chips
embed several dies, thus exposing several CS and RB pins, hence the
rb-gpios name.
Also, as described here [1], the convention is to name your property
<name>-gpios even if you only need one gpio.

Best Regards,

Boris

[1]http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio.txt#L16



-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com