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=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 47487C4360F for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 15:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220EB206DD for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 15:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726755AbfDCPcj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:32:39 -0400 Received: from smtp.asem.it ([151.1.184.197]:64447 "EHLO smtp.asem.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726245AbfDCPcj (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:32:39 -0400 Received: from webmail.asem.it by asem.it (smtp.asem.it) (SecurityGateway 5.5.0) with ESMTP id SG003789678.MSG for ; Wed, 03 Apr 2019 17:32:31 +0200S Received: from ASAS044.asem.intra (172.16.16.44) by ASAS044.asem.intra (172.16.16.44) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1261.35; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:32:31 +0200 Received: from ASAS044.asem.intra ([::1]) by ASAS044.asem.intra ([::1]) with mapi id 15.01.1261.035; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:32:31 +0200 From: Flavio Suligoi To: Alexandre Belloni CC: Alessandro Zummo , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , "linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: rtc: add battery-low-hw-alarm property Thread-Topic: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: rtc: add battery-low-hw-alarm property Thread-Index: AQHU6izzMP9bJdl0YUGdR5AsgVFjFaYqZSSAgAAiZeD//+Z9AIAAIfPw Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 15:32:31 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1554303165-24813-1-git-send-email-f.suligoi@asem.it> <20190403145709.GN22216@piout.net> <20190403152856.GP22216@piout.net> In-Reply-To: <20190403152856.GP22216@piout.net> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.16.17.208] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SGHeloLookup-Result: hardfail smtp.helo=webmail.asem.it (does not match 172.16.16.44) X-SGSPF-Result: none (smtp.asem.it) X-SGOP-RefID: str=0001.0A0B020A.5CA4D210.0053,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > On 03/04/2019 15:06:17+0000, Flavio Suligoi wrote: > > Hi Alexandre, > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 03/04/2019 16:52:44+0200, Flavio Suligoi wrote: > > > > Some RTC devices have a battery-low automatic detection circuit. > > > > The battery-low event is usually reported with: > > > > > > > > - a bit change in a RTC status register > > > > - a hw signaling (generally using an interrupt generation), changing > > > > the hw level of a specific pin; > > > > > > > > The new property "battery-low-hw-alarm" enable the RTC to generate > the > > > > hw signaling in case of battery-low event. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Flavio Suligoi > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc.txt | 3 +++ > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc.txt > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc.txt > > > > index a97fc6a..f93a44d 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc.txt > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc.txt > > > > @@ -31,6 +31,9 @@ below. > > > > expressed in femto Farad (fF). > > > > The default value shall be listed (if > > > optional), > > > > and likewise all valid values. > > > > +- battery-low-hw-alarm : Enable the "battery-low" output pin. > This > > > function > > > > > > I would name that voltage-low-alarm as not all the secondary voltages > > > are batteries. > > > > You have right. So we can also name the property a: "voltage-low-hw- > alarm". > > I prefer to have the word "hw" in the property name, since the "sw" > voltage > > low alarm is already present is some RTC drivers. > > In this way, with the word "hw", is more clear that we are speaking > about > > an hw pin signaling. > > > > Well, the device tree always describes the hardware so there is no point > in specifying hw. Right, so I rename the property in "voltage-low-alarm" > > > -- > Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com Flavio Suligoi