From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7CEC38142 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:57:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231482AbjBAB5e (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2023 20:57:34 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36782 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230098AbjBAB5a (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2023 20:57:30 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f49.google.com (mail-ot1-f49.google.com [209.85.210.49]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87D4F4FC37; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 17:57:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-f49.google.com with SMTP id n25-20020a9d7119000000b0068bd8c1e836so1795655otj.3; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 17:57:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Il4+q0bbik14msabTB8Ry4Vk2QXt2ITErIdFitMsV9E=; b=xA5cWOLfoysw++yTmbLHElxltqMKRNXExejKHB4jLSjqA5NCKiQefwFVdqwMx+Bf/6 nZnUvPRPLL26AWsvenjh+OloXYEIwOx/TsofQgvIBZdBVuweORb2rE2C6EI6hqnGNZ47 hmlIK2GnPONoLvGTKBR35w4ZzDONMCUnK2YkywaFCVivUt2aS90ByS6xGwpI3YE277OZ AEZnmOdhfVRSV+ftNB8wFkqiBt66+AUKmVG1z1OqRhAYGKVlHRMXF2F0tRxTD6r9lIID z98T7S1Oe4Xqe7F6rDgcspOMfzN0LDVOIxaCnDZ4dS6Wo0JhdpqKJLrb7mp58VUJo1Ew a01w== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXSvp8hv3n9D0O1VOHomvwjjasyPqng/5SUu0C9x3ifxj79xpoR oW3hn58ZIQ1jZNI1oP7kQSEWDEBw7g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+IUHvbSgpk5ghxTTGIPErQseQOTf9hnsChty4qdkANK1UYGB+c/W5c5LR16o6gYwKXs2OtCA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:6209:b0:68b:ccb5:c6d1 with SMTP id cd9-20020a056830620900b0068bccb5c6d1mr582252otb.22.1675216648701; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 17:57:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from robh_at_kernel.org (66-90-144-107.dyn.grandenetworks.net. [66.90.144.107]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g22-20020a9d6496000000b00684bede5359sm7406195otl.42.2023.01.31.17.57.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Jan 2023 17:57:28 -0800 (PST) Received: (nullmailer pid 2311344 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 01 Feb 2023 01:57:27 -0000 Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:57:27 -0600 From: Rob Herring To: Linus Walleij Cc: Konrad Dybcio , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, andersson@kernel.org, agross@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org, marijn.suijten@somainline.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pincfg-node: Introduce an overridable way to set bias on pins Message-ID: <20230201015727.GA2298086-robh@kernel.org> References: <20230130165435.2347569-1-konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 02:21:38PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 12:50 AM Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > > +#define DRIVE_STRENGTH 9 > > > +#define DRIVE_STRENGTH_UA 10 > > > > > > drive-strength = <8>; // 8mA drive strength > > > > > > bias-type = ; > > > > > > OK where do I put my 8 mA now? > > > > > If you look at the 2/2 patch, this property only reads BIAS_ > > values, which can't coexist anyway. > > Well the DT bindings have to be consistent and clear on their > own, no matter how Linux implements it. > > But I'm sure you can make YAML verification such that it is > impossible to use both schemes at the same time, and it's not > like I don't understand what you're getting at. We already don't enforce mutually exclusive combinations. Perhaps someone wants to fix that first? > What I need as input is mainly the DT bindings people opinion > on introducing another orthogonal way of doing something > that is already possible to do another way, just more convenient. > Because that is essentially what is happening here. It's really a 3rd way we're adding because the existing properties have 2 forms which IMO is worse than 2 disjoint ways of doing it. And since this new way can't represent some cases, I don't think it is an improvement. Rob