linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Use more standard GPIO binding

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: <CACRpkdZZHYSRXktPLHKRc4Afsegn4q3rOmcPMhXh5chC1jH-JQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Oct 2018 13:32:13 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Use more standard GPIO binding

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 11:06:54AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> >  Optional properties:
> > -- gpio: gpio to use for enable control
> > +- gpios: gpio to use for enable control
>
> Are we supposed to be able to have just plain gpios as a standards
> conforming property or would best practice be to call it enable-gpios or
> something?

Oh I didn't think of that really. The gpio-regulator indeed uses
enable-gpio for the same thing. But it complicates things codewise,
as the GPIO line is also optional. I'm a bit uncertain, I tend
to think just "gpios" is fine when the usage is unambigous. but
I don't know what the DT maintainers think.

Yours,
Linus Walleij