Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: leds: add generic LED consumer documentation

[Hans de Goede <hansg@kernel.org>]

Hi,

On 9-Sep-25 6:57 PM, Aleksandrs Vinarskis wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Monday, September 8th, 2025 at 01:18, Aleksandrs Vinarskis <alex@vinarskis.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Introduce common generic led consumer binding, where consumer defines
>> led(s) by phandle, as opposed to trigger-source binding where the
>> trigger source is defined in led itself.
>>
>> Add already used in some schemas 'leds' parameter which expects
>> phandle-array. Additionally, introduce 'led-names' which could be used
>> by consumers to map LED devices to their respective functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aleksandrs Vinarskis alex@vinarskis.com
>>
>> ---
>> .../devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d50a3850f6336e9e3a52eb1374e36ea50de27f47
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml
>> @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>> +%YAML 1.2
>> +---
>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/leds/leds-consumer.yaml#
>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>> +
>> +title: Common leds consumer
>> +
>> +maintainers:
>> + - Aleksandrs Vinarskis alex@vinarskis.com
>>
>> +
>> +description:
>> + Some LED defined in DT are required by other DT consumers, for example
>> + v4l2 subnode may require privacy or flash LED. Unlike trigger-source
>> + approach which is typically used as 'soft' binding, referencing LED
>> + devices by phandle makes things simpler when 'hard' binding is desired.
>> +
>> + Document LED properties that its consumers may define.
>> +
>> +select: true
>> +
>> +properties:
>> + leds:
>> + oneOf:
>> + - type: object
>> + - $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array
>> + description:
>> + A list of LED device(s) required by a particular consumer.
>> + items:
>> + maxItems: 1
>> +
>> + led-names:
> 
> While going over the feedback I realized `leds` and `led-names` do
> not follow `property`, `property-names` convention. Any objections
> if I rename `led-names` to `leds-names` for consistency?

No objections from me, `leds-names` indeed is better.

Regards,

Hans