linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dt: i2c: Add LPS001WP to the Trivial Devices list

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130904151159.GA8980@lee--X1>
Date:	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 16:11:59 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, sa@...-dreams.de
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"jic23@....ac.uk" <jic23@....ac.uk>,
	"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dt: i2c: Add LPS001WP to the Trivial
 Devices list

> Cheers for producing a binding.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 02:50:55PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > LPS001WP is a Pressure and Temperature sensor.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt
> > index ad6a738..6038807e6 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt
> > @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ st-micro,24c256		i2c serial eeprom  (24cxx)
> >  stm,m41t00		Serial Access TIMEKEEPER
> >  stm,m41t62		Serial real-time clock (RTC) with alarm
> >  stm,m41t80		M41T80 - SERIAL ACCESS RTC WITH ALARMS
> > +stm,lps001wp		Pressure and Temperature sensor
> 
> As I hinted at in the other thread [1], I don't think this can be
> documented as a trivial binding -- the driver expects a couple of
> regulators which should be described in the binding (or the driver
> shouldn't be using them...).

Surely all devices need to be powered and would subsequently require a
regulator of one description or other? We don't really *need* to
manually enable it on my platform but that's because it's 'always
on', but we do anyway for completeness.

Would a (regulator: vdd) note in this patch be suitable? It seems a
shame to have to produce a boilerplate binding entry for the sake of a
regulator.

Wolfram, what's the common procedure in cases such as these?

> Also, in the other thread the "st," prefix was used [2], while "stm," is
> listed at the prefix in the binding. As far as I can see, "st," should
> be used, as it's in vendor-prefixes and "stm," is not.
> 
> I'm happy to cook up a patch adding deprecation notes and corrected
> strings for the existing incorrect "stm," bindings.

Sure, feel free.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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/