[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0807171302190.27902@t2.domain.actdsltmp>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:18:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...escale.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
cc: avorontsov@...mvista.com, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] leds: implement OpenFirmare GPIO LED driver
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Grant Likely wrote:
> Alternately, I would also be okay with a scheme where all LED nodes
> have a common parent and an of_platform driver would bind against the
> parent node; not the individual children. Then the leds-gpio driver
> could be refactored to have both platform and of_platform bus
> bindings.
Basically what I did then in my patch then, refactor leds-gpio so most of
it is shared and there is a block of code that does platform binding and
another block that does of_platform binding.
I didn't change the OF platform binding syntax so as not to complicate the
example, but that's easy to do. Something like:
leds {
compatible = "gpio-led";
gpios = <&mpc8572 6 0
&mpc8572 7 0>;
labels = "red", "green";
};
Or like this, which needs a little more code to parse:
leds {
compatible = "gpio-led";
led@6 {
gpios = <&mpc8572 6 0>;
label = "red";
};
led@7 {
gpios = <&mpc8572 7 0>;
label = "green";
};
};
I like the first better. It follows the example from the docs about how
devices with multiple gpios should work too.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists