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: <20150311193654.GA3126@earth>
Date:	Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:36:54 +0100
From:	Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:	"Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
	Marek Belisko <marek@...delico.com>,
	Benoit Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] Documentation: DT: Document twl4030-madc-battery
 bindings

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:43:17AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> No no, "capacity-uah" is what we should use, but you need an ack from
> the battery and device tree people that this is OK. Let's not add
> "ti,capacity-uah” as that can obviously be a generic property.

I'm okay with capacity-uah.

> > [...]
> 
> Oh if they are battery spicific, then ideally we'd have generic batery
> voltage to capacity maps property rather than a custom ti specific
> property.
> 
> To avoid extra hassles later on, maybe you could submit a generic
> binding patch only documenting it to the battery people and the device
> tree people? That will make it easier to maintain this driver in the
> long run.

Actually the proper way would be to differentiate between the
battery and the measurement chip / adc and that should be
implemented in the long run. The kernel's power supply framework
is not yet ready for it, though.

Example DT:

battery {
    battery-specific-data;
};

fuel-gauge {
    measures = <&battery>;
};

charger {
    charges = <&battery>;
};

Since infrastructure for generic bindings is missing, I think its
best to have the vendor properties for now and map this to generic
properties, once they have been specified.

-- Sebastian

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ