From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753381AbbDCIVl (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2015 04:21:41 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:59209 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752115AbbDCIVc (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2015 04:21:32 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 10:21:29 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Javier Martinez Canillas Cc: Andrew Morton , pali.rohar@gmail.com, Sebastian Reichel , Sebastian Reichel , kernel list , linux-arm-kernel , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Lindgren , Kevin Hilman , Aaro Koskinen , ivo.g.dimitrov.75@gmail.com, patrikbachan@gmail.com, Kumar Gala , Benoit Cousson , sakari.ailus@iki.fi, m.chehab@samsung.com, "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] media: i2c/adp1653: devicetree support for adp1653 Message-ID: <20150403082129.GA10671@amd> References: <20150402143846.GA11687@amd> <20150402203417.GA6336@amd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > Fixed feedback by Sakari. > > > > Please apply, > > There is no need to ask for patches to be applied IMHO. It is expected > that people post patches wanting them to be applied unless there is an > RFC prefix in the subject or say explicitly that the patch is for > testing and should not be picked. See history of this patch. > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/adp1653.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/adp1653.txt > > When adding DT bindings, the Documentation portion should be in a > separate patch and should come in the series before the patch > implementing the binding. That makes the change easier to review, > please take a look to points 1 and 3 in > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt. Because actual patch at the end of email is too much eye clutter for the poor device tree people, I can prepare nice series... producing more work for me and more noise on the lists? No, thanks. > > +Required Properties: > > + > > + - compatible: Must contain be "adi,adp1653" > > + > > + - reg: I2C slave address > > + > > + - gpios: References to the GPIO that controls the power for the chip. > > The convention nowadays is to not use unnamed DT properties for GPIOs > but instead use a prefix that explains what those GPIOs are used for. > So something like "power-gpios" or "power-gpio" (if there is only one > GPIO) will be more suitable. Please take a look to > Documentation/gpio/board.txt for more details. Ok. Actually, reading docs below, "power-gpio" will not work, and it needs to be "power-gpios", right? > > + if (!of_find_property(node, "gpios", NULL)) { > > + dev_err(&client->dev, "No gpio node\n"); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + pd->power_gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(node, 0, &flags); > > The old integer-based GPIO interface is deprecated and we want to get > rid of it so please use the descriptor-based for new code. For example > you want to use gpiod_get() instead of of_get_gpio_flags(). > Documentation/gpio/gpio.txt describes the new interface. Ok. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html