Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: usb: dwc3: Clean up hs_phy_irq in binding

[Krishna Kurapati PSSNV]

On 12/27/2023 12:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/12/2023 16:03, Krishna Kurapati PSSNV wrote:
> > On 12/26/2023 5:52 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >
> > > > > This does not answer why, you sc8280xp and x1e80100 not get one optional
> > > > > interrupt. I asked "why" you are doing this change. Why do you need it?
> > > > > What is the rationale?
> > > > >
> > > > > Then I grunted about unmanageable commit, because all my troubles to
> > > > > review it are the effect of it: it is very difficult to read. It is also
> > > > > difficult for you, because you keep making here mistakes. So if you
> > > > > cannot write this commit properly and I cannot review it, then it is way
> > > > > over-complicated, don't you think? But this is still second problem
> > > > > here, don't ignore the fist - "why?"
> > > >
> > > > HI Krzysztof,
> > > >
> > > >     Thanks for the review.
> > > >     To answer the question,
> > > >
> > > > "why ?" : The interrupts have been mis-interpreted on many platforms or
> > > > many interrupts are missing.
> > >
> > > I asked about these two specific platforms. Please explain these
> > > changes. Above is so generic that tells me nothing.
> >
> > Is the question, "Why do x1e80100 and sc8280 don't have hs_phy_irq ?"
>
>   No, not entirely, the question was why these have flexible number of
> IRQs (last one optional)?
>
>
> > If so, I checked the SC8280 HW specifics and I see one small error. The
> > name was printed wrong. I got it from another source. Will move sc8280
> > to list having 5 interrupts. As per x1e80100, I wasn't able to get my
> > hands on the hw specifics and I followed the following link by Abel Vesa:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231214-x1e80100-usb-v1-1-c22be5c0109e@xxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > As per the above patch, x1e80100 had only 4 interrupts.
>
> Hm, ok, you say "4" but your patch says "minItems: 3". 3 != 4.

Actually, you are right. We don't need the max/min items as we are sure 
that the targets mentioned under this have 4 interrupts definitively.

But the optional interrupt was put in just in case any target comes in 
that has no ss_phy and no hs_phy and has only the other 3 interrupts. 
Since those targets are not present currently, I will remove the max/min 
items from this.

Thanks for the catch. Sorry for bothering you with a couple of mails 
because I didn't understand the question you were trying to ask.

Regards,
Krishna,