From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Use more standard GPIO binding
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 15:17:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+Dpv1NohnMaLEV3ZMdHYBwMZMaFtftc8z9X1wORCCT3A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181004135427.GE6412@sirena.org.uk>
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:54 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 01:32:13PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 11:06:54AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> > > > Optional properties:
> > > > -- gpio: gpio to use for enable control
> > > > +- gpios: gpio to use for enable control
>
> > > Are we supposed to be able to have just plain gpios as a standards
> > > conforming property or would best practice be to call it enable-gpios or
> > > something?
>
> > Oh I didn't think of that really. The gpio-regulator indeed uses
> > enable-gpio for the same thing. But it complicates things codewise,
> > as the GPIO line is also optional. I'm a bit uncertain, I tend
> > to think just "gpios" is fine when the usage is unambigous. but
> > I don't know what the DT maintainers think.
>
> Right, well from my point of view -gpio is perfectly fine also so... :)
> Rob?
Just 'gpios' is fine generally when there's only one (or one group).
Ideally, gpio-regulator would be a superset of fixed-regulator. The
difference would essentially be the voltage control gpios and state
properties. Changing the names though will break forwards
compatibility if dts files are updated and these are widely used. So
probably not worth trying to change unless you want to carry code to
handle both. That applies to gpio -> gpios too if dts files are
updated and older kernels don't handle both cases. But updating just
the documentation should be fine.
BTW, 'enable-active-high' is also a bit strange as that should just be
encoded into 'enable-gpio' flags. We should really deprecate that.
Rob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-05 20:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-04 9:06 [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Use more standard GPIO binding Linus Walleij
2018-10-04 10:50 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-04 11:32 ` Linus Walleij
2018-10-04 13:54 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-05 20:17 ` Rob Herring [this message]
2018-10-07 21:00 ` Linus Walleij
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAL_Jsq+Dpv1NohnMaLEV3ZMdHYBwMZMaFtftc8z9X1wORCCT3A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leonard.crestez@nxp.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).