From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCHv9 1/3] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:34:53 +0000 Message-ID: <20121126153453.2AA023E1AAA@localhost> References: <1353149747-31871-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <1353149747-31871-2-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <20121120215429.B621F3E1821@localhost> <13540495.epaCf4JVn9@percival> <20121122133941.24B883E129E@localhost> <20121122214021.GA14771@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121122214021.GA14771@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Thierry Reding Cc: Alexandre Courbot , "linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org" , Stephen Warren , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , Mark Brown , Mark Zhang , Rob Herring , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Alex Courbot , Anton Vorontsov , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , David Woodhouse , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:40:21 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 01:39:41PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > [...] > > I do think that each sequence should be contained within a single > > property, but I'm open to other suggestions. > > IIRC a very early prototype did implement something like that. However > because of the resource issues this had to be string based, so that the > sequences looked somewhat like (Alex, correct me if I'm wrong): > > power-on = <"REGULATOR", "power", 1, "GPIO", "enable", 1>; > > Instead we could possibly have something like: > > power-on = <0 ® 1, > 1 &gpio 42 0 1>; Yes, that would work, although I still think it would be a good idea to split the used resources off into the gpios/pwms/regs/etc properties. > Where the first cell in each entry defines the type (0 = regulator, 1 = > GPIO) and the rest would be a regular OF specifier for the given type of > resource along with some defined parameter such as enable/disable, > voltage, delay in ms, ... I don't know if that sounds any better. It > looks sort of cryptic but it is more "in the spirit of" DT, right Grant? It is still kind of a ham-handed approach, but it does fit better with existing conventions than the hierarchy of nodes does. g.