Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: input: Introduce Himax HID-over-SPI device

[Conor Dooley]

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 05:43:54PM +0800, yang tylor wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 5:22 PM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 03:56:25PM +0800, yang tylor wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:09 PM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 05:31:29PM +0800, yang tylor wrote:
> >
> > > > > The behavior of "himax,boot_time_fw_upgrade" seems not stable and
> > > > > should be removed. "himax,fw_in_flash", I use the kernel config for
> > > > > user to select.
> > > >
> > > > That seems like a bad idea, we want to be able to build one kernel that
> > > > works for all hardware at the same time.
> > > >
> > > I see, so I should take that back?
> > > I'll explain more about it.
> >
> > Are there particular ICs where the firmware would always be in flash and
> > others where it would never be? Or is this a choice made by the board or
> > system designer?
> >
> Most cases it's about the system designer's decision. But some ICs may be forced
> to use flash because of its architecture(multiple IC inside, need to
> load firmware to
> multiple IC's sram by master IC). But if there is no limitation on
> this part, most system
> designers will prefer flashless.

Forgive me if I am not understanding correctly, there are some ICs that
will need to load the firmware from flash and there are some where it
will be a decision made by the designer of the board. Is the flash part
of the IC or is it an external flash chip?

Cheers,
Conor.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature