From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Murphy Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: leds: Add bindings for lm3697 driver Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:15 -0500 Message-ID: <20a814ce-a4c5-0649-6677-6b85a5fd2321@ti.com> References: <20180906135005.6718-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180906211617.GB16899@amd> <20180907133228.GA16297@amd> <70f7506c-6a3d-3830-59a4-a246dc6163f7@ti.com> <226b8770-7041-39a4-5a06-6002a7c1225f@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <226b8770-7041-39a4-5a06-6002a7c1225f@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jacek Anaszewski , Pavel Machek Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org Jacek On 09/08/2018 02:53 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > Dan, > > On 09/07/2018 03:52 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: > [...] >>> >>>> And I think Jacek pointed out that the bindings references in this bindings >>>> don't even exist. >>>> >>>> I am thinking we need to deprecate this MFD driver and consolidate these drivers >>>> in the LED directory as we indicated before. I did not find any ti-lmu support >>>> code. >>>> >>>> ti-lmu common core code and then the LED children appending the feature differentiation. >>> >>>> Need some maintainer weigh in here. >>> >>> Hehe. I'm maintnainer. Fun. >> >> I know. I want to see if there was any other opinion. Especially for the LED driver. >> > [...] > > I have a question - is this lm3697 LED controller a cell of some MFD > device? Or is it a self-contained chip? > This is a self contained chip. And the LM3697 only function is a LED driver. It does not have any other special functions like the LM363X drivers for GPIO and Regulator support. Dan -- ------------------ Dan Murphy From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF2FC4321E for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:37:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCDA620854 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:37:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="YaQZJYZS" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DCDA620854 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728689AbeIJTbv (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 15:31:51 -0400 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.248]:37632 "EHLO lelv0143.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728127AbeIJTbv (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 15:31:51 -0400 Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w8AEbNjT041922; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:23 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1536590243; bh=CDOscDd714ORF/o0IDB/qJD9QkVZyLDJzsVqNDrT8LA=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=YaQZJYZS1Om1BbCICJJEwU/yB1IA619esCCG+40MdJ59K3hK9n3xXfFs7bXCII6/M uO22AbJgdJGiTnaqYgFjBO5dJuPtgZaett3Gq9Rz/iamvtZupDnjE+v4Lz9dwVPMoc ZPmBmPC3CbIumxZxZuppiOBBnQPrJC7ScUwpdw4M= Received: from DLEE104.ent.ti.com (dlee104.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.34]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w8AEbNbm003398; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:23 -0500 Received: from DLEE110.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.21) by DLEE104.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:23 -0500 Received: from dflp32.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.15) by DLEE110.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1466.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:22 -0500 Received: from [172.22.137.130] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dflp32.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w8AEbMpi024173; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:22 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: leds: Add bindings for lm3697 driver To: Jacek Anaszewski , Pavel Machek CC: , , , References: <20180906135005.6718-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180906211617.GB16899@amd> <20180907133228.GA16297@amd> <70f7506c-6a3d-3830-59a4-a246dc6163f7@ti.com> <226b8770-7041-39a4-5a06-6002a7c1225f@gmail.com> From: Dan Murphy Message-ID: <20a814ce-a4c5-0649-6677-6b85a5fd2321@ti.com> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:37:15 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <226b8770-7041-39a4-5a06-6002a7c1225f@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jacek On 09/08/2018 02:53 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > Dan, > > On 09/07/2018 03:52 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: > [...] >>> >>>> And I think Jacek pointed out that the bindings references in this bindings >>>> don't even exist. >>>> >>>> I am thinking we need to deprecate this MFD driver and consolidate these drivers >>>> in the LED directory as we indicated before. I did not find any ti-lmu support >>>> code. >>>> >>>> ti-lmu common core code and then the LED children appending the feature differentiation. >>> >>>> Need some maintainer weigh in here. >>> >>> Hehe. I'm maintnainer. Fun. >> >> I know. I want to see if there was any other opinion. Especially for the LED driver. >> > [...] > > I have a question - is this lm3697 LED controller a cell of some MFD > device? Or is it a self-contained chip? > This is a self contained chip. And the LM3697 only function is a LED driver. It does not have any other special functions like the LM363X drivers for GPIO and Regulator support. Dan -- ------------------ Dan Murphy