From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
To: Markus Pargmann <mpa@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
linus.walleij@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com,
mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
treding@nvidia.com, Benoit Parrot <bparrot@ti.com>,
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 17:23:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E16053.60802@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2337414.ntEtcfKnX0@hermes>
On Thursday 10 March 2016 04:46 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> On Thursday 10 March 2016 12:37:32 Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> On Wednesday 09 March 2016 10:47 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2016 06:20 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>> The problem with that is the description used when acquiring the GPIO
>>> is just "wlan_input", "wlan_output", or "wlan_control". There's
>>> nothing to indicate what those individual pins do (perhaps one is a
>>> reset signal, one is a regulator enable, etc.?) By requiring separate
>>> nodes for each GPIO, then the node name can provide a meaningful
>>> semantic name/description for each GPIO, which provides much more
>>> information.
>>>
>> On this case, we have already property "line-name" and passed the name
>> of the gpio via this property.
>> The property names is "line-name" which is good for one string. We can
>> support other property "line-names" with multiple string per GPIO index.
>>
>> line-names = "wlan-reset", "wlan-enable";
> There is currently a discussion about the future bindings for subnodes in GPIO
> controller nodes. Please have a look at these two mail threads:
>
> "Device tree binding documentation for gpio-switch"
> "gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog"
Second one is this patch only. Is it by intention?
The binding details about the gpio-switch and names are given by
property "lable". I think property "label" is standard way of going
forward i.e. I post similar patch for gpio-keys device name from DT
after got review comment.
So here, we can have the gpio names under property "label" or "labels".
Or am I missing anything?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
To: Markus Pargmann <mpa@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
<linus.walleij@linaro.org>, <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
<pawel.moll@arm.com>, <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>, <treding@nvidia.com>,
Benoit Parrot <bparrot@ti.com>,
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 17:23:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E16053.60802@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2337414.ntEtcfKnX0@hermes>
On Thursday 10 March 2016 04:46 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> On Thursday 10 March 2016 12:37:32 Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> On Wednesday 09 March 2016 10:47 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2016 06:20 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>> The problem with that is the description used when acquiring the GPIO
>>> is just "wlan_input", "wlan_output", or "wlan_control". There's
>>> nothing to indicate what those individual pins do (perhaps one is a
>>> reset signal, one is a regulator enable, etc.?) By requiring separate
>>> nodes for each GPIO, then the node name can provide a meaningful
>>> semantic name/description for each GPIO, which provides much more
>>> information.
>>>
>> On this case, we have already property "line-name" and passed the name
>> of the gpio via this property.
>> The property names is "line-name" which is good for one string. We can
>> support other property "line-names" with multiple string per GPIO index.
>>
>> line-names = "wlan-reset", "wlan-enable";
> There is currently a discussion about the future bindings for subnodes in GPIO
> controller nodes. Please have a look at these two mail threads:
>
> "Device tree binding documentation for gpio-switch"
> "gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog"
Second one is this patch only. Is it by intention?
The binding details about the gpio-switch and names are given by
property "lable". I think property "label" is standard way of going
forward i.e. I post similar patch for gpio-keys device name from DT
after got review comment.
So here, we can have the gpio names under property "label" or "labels".
Or am I missing anything?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-10 12:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-08 12:02 [PATCH 0/5] gpio: of: Add error handling and support for multiple gpio in gpio-hog Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 1/5] gpio: of: Scan available child node for gpio-hog Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 14:18 ` Thierry Reding
2016-03-08 14:18 ` Thierry Reding
2016-03-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 2/5] gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:27 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-03-08 12:27 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-03-08 14:22 ` Thierry Reding
2016-03-08 14:22 ` Thierry Reding
2016-03-08 15:32 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 15:32 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-09 17:07 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <56E0584B.9050607-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-10 6:58 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-10 6:58 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 3/5] gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog configuration failed Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 14:23 ` Thierry Reding
2016-03-08 14:23 ` Thierry Reding
2016-03-09 17:11 ` Stephen Warren
2016-03-10 7:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-10 7:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 4/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-09 6:28 ` Markus Pargmann
2016-03-09 13:20 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-09 13:20 ` Laxman Dewangan
[not found] ` <56E02335.6020901-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-09 17:17 ` Stephen Warren
2016-03-09 17:17 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <56E05AA9.8000503-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-10 7:07 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-10 7:07 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-10 11:16 ` Markus Pargmann
2016-03-10 11:53 ` Laxman Dewangan [this message]
2016-03-10 11:53 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-17 15:46 ` Rob Herring
2016-03-17 17:44 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-17 17:44 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 5/5] gpio: DT: Rephrase property "gpios" of hog node to support multiple gpios Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-08 12:02 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-03-09 17:18 ` Stephen Warren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56E16053.60802@nvidia.com \
--to=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=bparrot@ti.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mpa@pengutronix.de \
--cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=treding@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.