From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rajanikanth HV Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] power_supply: Define Binding for supplied-nodes Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 11:34:30 +0530 Message-ID: <5121C46E.1030007@stericsson.com> References: <1360971416-30717-1-git-send-email-rklein@nvidia.com> <1360971416-30717-2-git-send-email-rklein@nvidia.com> <20130216223804.GF1741@lizard.sbx05280.losalca.wayport.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130216223804.GF1741@lizard.sbx05280.losalca.wayport.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Anton Vorontsov Cc: Rhyland Klein , David Woodhouse , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Arnd Bergmann List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 17 February 2013 04:08 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote: [...] > > "supplied nodes" sounds confusing (doesn't reflect direction), IMO. I'd > rather call it power-supply,supplied-to = <&some_battery>; > > But... I'm recalling there was a similar discussion not that long ago, and > Arnd came up with the idea that supplied-to is not fully in spirit of DT, > and proposed his view of proper bindings. Please find the discussion here: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/14/104 'supplied-to or supplied nodes' is specific to "power-supply core and battery managed devices/drivers" and not platform specific. Dependent battery drivers interacts/shares power supply events with the help of 'supplied_to' 'num_supplicants' and external_power_changed(...) identifiers which are defined and fixed during driver design, it will be more meaningful to have it internal to drivers instead DT. Ref: ab8500_[fg,btemp,charger].c, abx500_chargalg.c and arch/arm/boot/dts/dbx5x0.dtsi Thanks, Rajanikanth [...]