From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] Documentation: add LP3943 DT bindings and document Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:58:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20130923075810.GC2185@lee--X1> References: <1378949700-6384-1-git-send-email-milo.kim@ti.com> <20130912152455.GN11227@lee--X1> <523F0040.6050900@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <523F0040.6050900@ti.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Milo Kim Cc: Samuel Ortiz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij , Thierry Reding , devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > >>+++ b/Documentation/lp3943.txt > >>@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ > >>+TI/National Semiconductor LP3943 MFD driver > >>+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > >Why do you need to document your driver in this way? > > > >If this stuff is really important (and most of it really isn't), the= n > >put it either in the commit log or in the driver. >=20 > Unnecessary documentation makes it noisy, but I think the LP3943 > still needs the driver documentation for better understanding. >=20 > Many people think LP3943 is just LED driver, but I really want to > share the application usages - PWM generators and GPIO expanders. > If the driver just supports LED functionality, then it would be > created as LED class driver. However, this patch-set enables more > generic driver usages. > So, this documentation would be helpful. >=20 > And I want to keep the code and the documentation separate. > If the link address is changed, then only documentation file will be > modified, not source file. >=20 > So, I'd like to create the fifth patch-set with new MFD > documentation subdirectory. > Additionally, LP3943 platform data example code will be added in the > 'Documentation/mfd/lp3943.txt'. It's for a platform which doesn't > support the device tree. So, I'd actually like to get Sam's opinion on this. NB: The documentation looks pretty rough at the moment. If we decide to accept the concept, it will have to be adapted quite a bit before full acceptance of the document will be granted. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog