linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFC] DT: leds: Fix 'label' property description and add 'colour' property

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: <20171204104351.GA6611@amd>
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2017 11:43:51 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        robh@...nel.org, sakari.ailus@....fi, dmurphy@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] DT: leds: Fix 'label' property description and add
 'colour' property

Hi!

> Label property was imposed a uniqueness requirement, which was erroneous,
> since ePAPR defines it to "a human readable string describing a device".
> 
> Also the binding description misleadingly suggested direct usage of label
> for LED class device name, whereas it should only define a LED function.
> 
> Therefore an additional 'colour' property is being introduced, which together
> with the parent DT node name used for devicename shall be used for naming LED
> class device according to the patterh
> <devicename>:<colour>:<function>.


> -- label : The label for this LED. If omitted, the label is taken from the node
> -	  name (excluding the unit address). It has to uniquely identify
> -	  a device, i.e. no other LED class device can be assigned the same
> -	  label.
> +- label : The label for this LED. It should describe its function. If omitted,
> +          the label is taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).

So the label contains "as1235:green:capslock"? I guess it might be
nice to mention that. Or just the "capslock" part?

Also.. it would be good to start pushing for more consistency in the
labels: I have these on the thinkpad:

input5::scrolllock/   tpacpi::dock_status2/ tpacpi::unknown_led/
mmc0::/               tpacpi:green:batt/    tpacpi::unknown_led2/
phy0-led/             tpacpi:orange:batt/   tpacpi::unknown_led3/
tpacpi::bay_active/   tpacpi::power/

On embedded system, I'd like to see <devicename> to corespond
to.. device the led belongs to, as opposed to name of the chip that
drives the led. Maybe we should do 'main_camera:white:flash' instead of
'as4132:white:flash' because userspace already has information on what
chip it is (sysfs paths), but can not easily figure out to which
device the flash belongs.

> +- colour : Colour of the LED.
>  
>  - default-state : The initial state of the LED. Valid values are "on", "off",
>    and "keep". If the LED is already on or off and the default-state
> -	  property is

Best regards,
								Pavel


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)