From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] DT: leds: Improve description of flash LEDs related properties Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 11:17:24 +0200 Message-ID: <20150408091724.GD5646@amd> References: <1427809965-25540-1-git-send-email-j.anaszewski@samsung.com> <1427809965-25540-2-git-send-email-j.anaszewski@samsung.com> <20150403120910.GL20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <5524ECDC.1070609@samsung.com> <20150408091129.GT20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150408091129.GT20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sakari Ailus Cc: Jacek Anaszewski , linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, cooloney@gmail.com, rpurdie@rpsys.net, s.nawrocki@samsung.com, Sakari Ailus , devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > I think that a board designed so that it can be damaged because of > > software bugs should be considered not eligible for commercial > > use. Hello? It is 2015. Yes, that was nice rule... in 1995 or so :-). > > As I mentioned in the previous message in this subject, the max-microamp > > property refers also to non-flash LEDs. Since existing LED class devices > > does not require them, then it should be left optional and default to > > max. It would however be inconsistent with flash LEDs related > > properties. For non-flash LEDs and backward compatibility, I guess you are right. Inconsistency is fine in this case... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html