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 2C9CDC433F5 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 19:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0DA720658 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 19:51:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="rgmZOMiG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C0DA720658 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 S1728866AbeIKAq7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 20:46:59 -0400 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.248]:33824 "EHLO lelv0143.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728153AbeIKAq7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 20:46:59 -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 w8AJpDc7117312; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:51:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1536609074; bh=KnFPWpFu8mlYNaSjAGzGw7Z+mcO3fhclAvSsKBitB+k=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=rgmZOMiGDujHTvvY3n25K4iqymPK18hjHRIxAJmktm7vvN/OFCqd0bD09Fghy84dP JqtWx1f8gEUxa0G2Q64CZQYLlZ7rnns3b2/FtPr7888cq5K18k/jb2XJiBIYayi+Bu 4yTb/GrbTPMkwP8SRbgXNkQlvgHXkEPMGmoz0blo= Received: from DLEE107.ent.ti.com (dlee107.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.37]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w8AJpDjd024956; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:51:13 -0500 Received: from DLEE107.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.37) by DLEE107.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.37) 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 14:51:14 -0500 Received: from dflp33.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.16) by DLEE107.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.37) 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 14:51:14 -0500 Received: from [172.22.175.150] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dflp33.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w8AJpD9l024359; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:51:13 -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> <20a814ce-a4c5-0649-6677-6b85a5fd2321@ti.com> <59561e0f-e3b9-7898-a300-90b198ad14e6@gmail.com> From: Dan Murphy Message-ID: <20d9ea9e-bbb8-2240-97cc-615e3fbcef8c@ti.com> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:51:06 -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: <59561e0f-e3b9-7898-a300-90b198ad14e6@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 09/10/2018 02:07 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > Dan, Pavel, > > On 09/10/2018 04:37 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >> 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. > > This is an argument for merging it as a standalone LED class driver > then. It is even more justifiable, taking into account uncertainties > related to the proper way of adding the support for it to the existing > MFD driver, whereas the code reuse would be the only advantage of having > thus support in MFD subsystem. > Does the argument carry over to the other devices? Like the LM3632 (part of the ti-lmu) has flash and torch and no other special functions so it would look like the lm3601x family with different register mappings. The LM3631 seems to also be just a LED driver with no extra functionality I could go buy an EVM and put together a driver for that device as well using the lm3601x as reference. Dan -- ------------------ Dan Murphy