Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] iio: proximity: add driver for ST VL53L1X ToF sensor

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 09:12:30PM +0600, Sirat wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 8:28 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 04:40:35AM +0600, Siratul Islam wrote:

...

> > > ---
> > > Changes in v3:
> > > - Merge DT binding into existing st,vl53l0x.yaml (per Krzysztof).
> > > - Use "reset-gpios" in the binding but xshut_gpio in the driver since that's the actual pin name.
> >
> > But why is it "reset" in the bindings? If it's a power rail or enable pin, why
> > not call it as a such in the bindings? The connection on PCB level is different story.
> >
> In v2, I actually used a separate st,vl53l1x.yaml binding with
> `xshut-gpios` and a required `vdd-supply`.
> But Krzysztof pointed out that they share the same pins so the
> existing st,vl53l0x.yaml should suffice,
> using reset as the xshut pin.

> I think a choice has to be made here:
> 1. Either I use the st,vl53l0x.yaml binding with wrong pin name and
> optional vdd-supply to not break existing code.
> 2. Or use a separate binding st,vl53l1x.yaml with 1. correct pin name,
> and 2. require vdd-supply
> 
> Krzysztof, do you have a preference on how we should handle this?

I am not a DT guy, I only know (?) that the DT should describe HW.
In HW this pin seems like power enable which can roughly be considered
as reset. So from SW point of view it probably makes little to no
difference.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko