Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-195731-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 18:25:10 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@analog.com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	David Jander <david@protonic.nl>,
	Martin Sperl <kernel@martin.sperl.org>, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/8] spi: dt-bindings: spi-peripheral-props: add
 spi-offloads property
Message-ID: <20240530-unaltered-thong-a6e52519f101@spud>
References: <20240514-aspire-ascension-449556da3615@spud>
 <CAMknhBFFpEGcMoLo5gsC11Syv+CwUM0mnq1yDMUzL1uutUtB+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240516-rudder-reburial-dcf300504c0a@spud>
 <CAMknhBF_s0btus4yqPe-T=F3z7Asi9KkRGsGr7FHDFi=k4EQjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240519-abreast-haziness-096a57ef57d3@spud>
 <CAMknhBHvEse2FyDoBXR1PvymGpSGq8dotKfm+8XH+0+k+xKtQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240522-gullible-ibuprofen-cf9111c25f6f@spud>
 <59df2cc3-5a62-45be-a0aa-5bbff13c2ae4@baylibre.com>
 <20240526-stylized-preaching-d0b15a95fe19@spud>
 <baa286ca-3388-4604-9bc3-233c1fc77c42@baylibre.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nlIBklSo3KTqCWIO"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <baa286ca-3388-4604-9bc3-233c1fc77c42@baylibre.com>


--nlIBklSo3KTqCWIO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 03:10:54PM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> On 5/26/24 10:45 AM, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 09:28:54AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
>=20
>=20
> >> * A is the one we need to figure out. I'm proposing that the PWM consu=
mer
> >>   should be whatever kind of composite device node we come up with that
> >>   also solves the issue described below about where does the CRC check=
er
> >>   (or whatever) go. I think we are in agreement here at least on the p=
oint
> >>   that it doesn't belong in the SPI controller node?
> >=20
> > To be clear, you're saying that we agree that the CRC checker doesnt
> > belong in the SPI controller node, right?
>=20
> Yes.=20

Okay, ye. We're on the same page then about that part.


--nlIBklSo3KTqCWIO
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZli2dgAKCRB4tDGHoIJi
0pjHAQCA1My+hayttX0Rfvpc9/Yovyg3HVsBE4YZTTK4+pNrmAEAlmsqE+T4GClt
SZyq1aNDCiMpi/6NTsWEf1+r0blkpgI=
=CHF9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nlIBklSo3KTqCWIO--