Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: mmc: Add post-power-off-delay-ms property

[Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>]

Hi Ulf,

On 7/17/26 12:40 PM, Judith Mendez wrote:
> Hi Ulf,
> 
> On 7/17/26 5:21 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 1:26 AM Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Add post-power-off-delay-ms property to MMC controller common.
>>>
>>> This property shall be used to specify delay if needed after
>>> deasserting power during MMC power cycles.
>>
>> Please clarify with some additional information from the cover-letter,
>> like "specify custom delays after MMC power off to work around
>> hardware issues such as slow RC circuites on MMC VDD rails."
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>
>>> ---
>>>   .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc-controller-common.yaml    | 8 ++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc-controller- 
>>> common.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc-controller- 
>>> common.yaml
>>> index 3d7195e9461c3..3ff68d32a308f 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc-controller-common.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc-controller-common.yaml
>>> @@ -275,6 +275,14 @@ properties:
>>>         not available.
>>>       default: 10
>>>
>>> +  post-power-off-delay-ms:
>>
>> For mmc-pwrseq-simple we already have "power-off-delay-us", perhaps
>> better to re-use that name instead.
> 
> Besides having the same dt property name as mmc-pwrseq-simple what is
> the benefit of switching to power-off-delay-us?
> 
> All values will have to be in us instead of ms and thus will look a bit
> less clean in code. If it is just a naming  preference, I do prefer
> the current name in this version, please let me know if we can keep:
> post-power-off-delay-ms.
> 

Forgot to mention, we are using mmc_delay which takes ms, if we switch
to microsecond dt property, we would have to make conversions or not use
mmc_delay.

~ Judith