Re: [PATCH RFT 1/3] dt-bindings: i2c: mpc: use proper binding for transfer timeouts

[Chris Packham]

Hi Andi,

On 5/03/24 04:16, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 11:58:11AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> "i2c-scl-clk-low-timeout-us" has flaws in itself and the usage here is
>> all wrong. The driver doesn't use it as a maximum time for clock
>> stretching but the maximum time for a total transfer. We already have
>> a binding for the latter. Convert the wrong binding from examples.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mpc.yaml | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mpc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mpc.yaml
>> index 70fb69b923c4..b1d7d14c0be4 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mpc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mpc.yaml
>> @@ -96,6 +96,6 @@ examples:
>>           interrupts = <43 2>;
>>           interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>>           clock-frequency = <400000>;
>> -        i2c-scl-clk-low-timeout-us = <10000>;
>> +        i2c-transfer-timeout-us = <10000>;
> Chris, can you please give it an ack?
>
> The whole series is coherent to this change.

Looks like you weren't on the To: list for the cover letter which I 
replied to.

For the series

Reviewed-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

and on a P2041RDB

Tested-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>