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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215B1C28CC0 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 14:31:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D2525AF2 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 14:31:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="vqlNLopf" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726820AbfE3ObA (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2019 10:31:00 -0400 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]:57960 "EHLO lelv0142.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725440AbfE3Oa7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2019 10:30:59 -0400 Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x4UEUqEa063847; Thu, 30 May 2019 09:30:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1559226652; bh=Cg30MeZA99CqmwGHpSCXMESG3MfaMxR7+LwVQ+Gg4Uo=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=vqlNLopfA8qkd2o5CEXM8oA8SZd2A64ck04yKT09X0fpUzrQ60JaBUuH7AKhWkXqI lgtye+vVpoZ/o6EXhtL7TktSyIhnBJts9Xyt1vCIL6dDSBAMFV06Ge9clwdOXmr3y0 mVmjvKCNgz+8g58Qxs7HTTp+JjgKqgK4gDb730FQ= Received: from DLEE109.ent.ti.com (dlee109.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.41]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x4UEUqx7095739 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 30 May 2019 09:30:52 -0500 Received: from DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) by DLEE109.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Thu, 30 May 2019 09:30:50 -0500 Received: from lelv0326.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.84) by DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 30 May 2019 09:30:49 -0500 Received: from [10.250.65.13] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0326.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x4UEUnRo039151; Thu, 30 May 2019 09:30:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/9] leds: multicolor: Add sysfs interface definition To: Jacek Anaszewski , , CC: , , References: <20190523190820.29375-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <20190523190820.29375-2-dmurphy@ti.com> <185abdd6-100c-0a71-2da9-8f556d8ea701@ti.com> <333167d0-4615-2fbe-e933-cbca623998ef@gmail.com> From: Dan Murphy Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 09:30:48 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jacek On 5/28/19 1:29 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > On 5/28/19 8:19 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >> Jacek >> >> On 5/28/19 12:44 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>> Dan, >>> >>> On 5/28/19 7:32 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >>>> Jacek >>>> >>>> On 5/27/19 3:00 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>>>> Hi Dan, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for the update. >>>>> >>>>> One thing is missing here - we need to document how legacy brightness >>>>> levels map to the sub-LED color levels, i.e. what you do in >>>>> multicolor_set_brightness(). >>>> >>>> >>>> Ok so i will need to document the algorithm that is used to >>>> determine the color LED brightness. >>> >>> Right, and please send just an update of that single patch. >>> >> >> So you are asking for v4 with only this patch updated. > > Not exactly - I am asking for v4 of this patch. We don't need > to spam the lists with the rest of unaltered patches from the series. > > The interface seems to be the most vital part of this patch set, > and it is possible that it will undergo at least slight modifications. > > We will move to discussing the code once we achieve a total consensus. > Sorry for the late reply.  OK I have updated the sysfs documentation but in doing so I am also going to send in v4 of the sysfs documentation as it explains the interfaces in more detail. Also I will be adding more technical information into that sysfs doc on what is done and what to expect and it's usage. Dan