From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jacek Anaszewski Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] dt-bindings: ti-lmu: Remove LM3697 Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 20:35:44 +0200 Message-ID: <7bb0462c-e641-0c58-1f68-bd02d38edab2@gmail.com> References: <20180911170825.17789-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180911170825.17789-2-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180911200530.GA28290@amd> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180911200530.GA28290@amd> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Machek , Dan Murphy Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 09/11/2018 10:05 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Tue 2018-09-11 12:08:20, Dan Murphy wrote: >> Remove support for the LM3697 LED device >> from the ti-lmu. The LM3697 will be supported >> via a stand alone LED driver. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy > > I'd really like to see better explanation here. > > We have existing binding, for lm3697 and similar devices. With this > series, different binding is introduced, without documented reason. > > That's bad. > > Now, maybe you are right and the hardware should be handled by > drivers/leds, not drivers/mfd. But we should have solution for all the > similar chips, and that still does not mean we have to modify the > binding. (But maybe we want to move it to different > directory). Bindings are supposed to describe hardware, not mirror > structure of our drivers. > > Unless there's something fatally wrong with the binding... but in such > case we'd like to know what is wrong. Dangling references ? > [And yes, I recognize current situation is ... not ideal and I'm > willing to help. But I'm not sure this is step in right direction.] > > Thanks, -- Best regards, Jacek Anaszewski