From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jacek Anaszewski Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/1] leds: LED driver for TI LP3952 6-Channel Color LED Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 14:33:53 +0200 Message-ID: <577BA931.5070403@samsung.com> References: <1467129919-27641-1-git-send-email-tony.makkiel@daqri.com> <3435169.nmqvdouPPq@vostro.rjw.lan> <57737021.1010603@samsung.com> <57739DCE.3030303@daqri.com> <5773A8CF.10508@samsung.com> <577B9038.1040304@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout2.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.12]:63440 "EHLO mailout2.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751427AbcGEMd6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2016 08:33:58 -0400 In-reply-to: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Tony , linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, rpurdie@rpsys.net, Len Brown , Mika Westerberg , ACPI Devel Maling List On 07/05/2016 02:12 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Jacek Anaszewski > wrote: >> PING >> >> >> On 06/29/2016 12:54 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>> >>> On 06/29/2016 12:07 PM, Tony wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 29/06/16 07:52, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Rafael, >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >>>>>>> +static const struct acpi_device_id lp3952_acpi_match[] = { >>>>>>> + {LP3952_ACPI_NAME, 0}, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No, you can't use "PRP0001" in this list. >>>>>> >>>>>>> + {} >>>>>>> +}; >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, lp3952_acpi_match); >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And you don't need this for the "PRP0001" thing to work. The core will >>>>>> take care of it for you then. >>>>>> >>>>>>> +#endif >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So the entire ACPI block can be dropped for now. >>>>>> >>>>>> And the driver doesn't have to depend on CONFIG_ACPI any more, does it? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The driver currently supports probing only with ACPI. >>>>> I have one question BTW: isn't there anything similar to the device tree >>>>> bindings documentation required for ACPI overlays? >>>>> Pointer to the discussion which led us to this solution: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-leds/msg06230.html >>>>> >>>> _DSD is working now. I managed to get "PRP0001" working as suggested by >>>> Rafael in >>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=146711623115228&w=2 >>>> with _DSD >>> >>> >>> Thanks for the link. >>> >>> Rafael, "Package" entries seem to mimic Device Tree properties defined >>> in the common leds bindings. Would it be possible to make it even >>> more compatible and define every LED connected to the LED controller >>> in the form of a child node, similarly as in case of LED DT bindings? >>> >>> See Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/common.txt and other >>> bindings in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds. > > I'm not sure what you mean. > > If somebody decides to arrange the data in their ACPI tables to follow > that scheme, it will just work IMO. > > Is there anything more that needs to be done in the kernel here? In case of Device Tree based platforms it is customary to define each LED as a child node of the LED controller node. LED names can then be obtained from the 'label' property or DT node name. Tony has encountered some issues [1] while trying to follow this pattern. Tony, could you please double check that? [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-leds/msg06230.html -- Best regards, Jacek Anaszewski