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=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 3697FC5DF61 for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 19:16:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE37F206BA for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 19:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="hiQv1SCT" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390894AbfKETQC (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:16:02 -0500 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]:60696 "EHLO lelv0142.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390526AbfKETQB (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:16:01 -0500 Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xA5JFQhd056692; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:15:26 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1572981326; bh=EcoGS6j0s8IWE01lKKx9TXLRSHW8gbHmupnZYacNFWg=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=hiQv1SCTJvcMHBzAopoD1ytQNtPv60OtKZshyfH/29z8ioz2LfWvN1b6r1jvxX/mB 4gfSiu8zMV3JsJtVr7SuiOmlbSRr5eM6ayTtFaTHNdIp7aBtbX3gkajdTkAaBJyJDz Kuu5/s09dJ9Njpx1TrveXVrZ/3+olbhatO4LjHEI= Received: from DLEE113.ent.ti.com (dlee113.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.24]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id xA5JFQK7069157 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:15:26 -0600 Received: from DLEE100.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.30) by DLEE113.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:15:11 -0600 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DLEE100.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:15:11 -0600 Received: from [10.250.33.226] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xA5JFPs1030118; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:15:25 -0600 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/15] dt-bindings: leds: ROHM BD71282 PMIC LED driver To: Matti Vaittinen , CC: Jacek Anaszewski , Pavel Machek , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Lee Jones , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , Alessandro Zummo , Alexandre Belloni , , , , , , References: From: Dan Murphy Message-ID: <37d85b2d-8fca-a998-95ae-61f0c049054d@ti.com> Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:14:33 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Matti On 11/1/19 6:32 AM, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > Document ROHM BD71828 PMIC LED driver device tree bindings. > > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen > --- > > Changes from v2 - new patch > > .../bindings/leds/rohm,leds-bd71828.yaml | 46 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/rohm,leds-bd71828.yaml > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/rohm,leds-bd71828.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/rohm,leds-bd71828.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..d8aeac9911ef > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/rohm,leds-bd71828.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +%YAML 1.2 > +--- > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/leds/rohm,leds-bd71828.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: ROHM BD71828 Power Management Integrated Circuit LED driver > + > +maintainers: > + - Jacek Anaszewski > + - Pavel Machek > + - Dan Murphy > + - Rob Herring > + - Mark Rutland I believe you are the maintainer of this driver not the maintainers > + > +description: | > + This module is part of the ROHM BD71828 MFD device. For more details > + see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml. > + > + The LED controller is represented as a sub-node of the PMIC node on the device > + tree. > + > + The device has two LED outputs referred as GRNLED and AMBLED in data-sheet. > + > +properties: > + compatible: > + const: rohm,bd71828-led > + > +patternProperties: > + "^led-[1-2]$": > + type: object > + description: > + Properties for a single LED. Nodes must be named as led-1 and led-2. Why is this required?  Can't we use the reg as the number and then we can use standard node labels like led@.  Then we can check in the code to make sure that the output is not out of bounds. > + properties: > + #$ref: "common.yaml#" > + function: > + description: > + Purpose of LED as defined in dt-bindings/leds/common.h > + $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string" > + color: > + description: > + LED colour as defined in dt-bindings/leds/common.h s/colour/color But again I believe it is indicated above that the LEDs are either going to be green or amber.  Unless they can be any color. Are there plans to make sure that the color is either green or amber in the code?  I don't see a patch for the code in this series > + $ref: "/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32" > + > +required: > + - compatible Is there an example of the node and properties? Dan