From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:13:54 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 10/19] ARM: dts: at91: replace gpio-key,wakeup with wakeup-source property In-Reply-To: References: <1445422216-29375-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1445422216-29375-11-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <5627672D.60108@atmel.com> <56276832.9040006@arm.com> Message-ID: <56277372.6080203@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 21/10/15 12:01, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 21 October 2015 at 12:25, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> >> On 21/10/15 11:21, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >>> >>> Le 21/10/2015 12:10, Sudeep Holla a ?crit : >>>> >>>> Though the keyboard driver for GPIO buttons(gpio-keys) will continue to >>>> check for/support the legacy "gpio-key,wakeup" boolean property to >>>> enable gpio buttons as wakeup source, "wakeup-source" is the new >>>> standard binding. >>>> >>>> This patch replaces the legacy "gpio-key,wakeup" with the unified >>>> "wakeup-source" property in order to avoid any futher copy-paste >>>> duplication. >>>> >>>> Cc: Nicolas Ferre >>> >>> >>> I'm not against this if the whole series goes further. >>> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre >>> >> >> Thanks ! >> >>> I suspect that we would need to take this patch with us on the AT91 >>> branches that would go to arm-soc. Is it the intentions? >>> >> >> Yes that was my intention for splitting the patches per SoC group. >> Many SoC maintainers prefer that. > > Hold on! All patches that changes the DT parsing to accept the > "standardized wakeup-source" binding, need to be merged upstream > before corresponding DTS changes. > Agreed. Sorry for that I forgot about it as there are only few subsystems that needed additions. Most of the input subsystem had already moved to new binding, just that binding documents were left unchanged. > Therefore, I suggest we go for a two step approach, starting with > changes affecting the DT parsing/documentation for various > drivers/subsystem and perhaps we can reach 4.4 for these. > Then the DTS changes can go in at any later point. > Looks good to me. -- Regards, Sudeep