linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 03/26] dt-bindings: leds: Add LED

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:17:01 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
        linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, dtor@...gle.com,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
        Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Oleh Kravchenko <oleg@....org.ua>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Simon Shields <simon@...eageos.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/26] dt-bindings: leds: Add LED_FUNCTION definitions

On Fri 2019-11-15 14:01:50, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Jacek,
> 
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 9:09 PM Jacek Anaszewski
> <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com> wrote:
> > Add initial set of common LED function definitions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
> 
> > --- a/include/dt-bindings/leds/common.h
> > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/leds/common.h
> > @@ -30,4 +31,45 @@
> >  #define LED_COLOR_ID_IR                7
> >  #define LED_COLOR_ID_MAX       8
> >
> > +/* Standard LED functions */
> > +#define LED_FUNCTION_ACTIVITY "activity"
> 
> What's the appropriate function for "general purpose" or "user" LEDs on
> development boards, where the LEDs don't have fixed functions, unlike
> on real products?
> Perhaps just LED_FUNCTION_INDICATOR?

I'd prefer such LEDs to not exist :-).

> I noticed your very initial submission defined LED_FUNCTION_USER "user".
> I couldn't find an explanation for the rationale behind its removal in later
> revisions, or any discussion asking for that.

There are "user" leds even on non-development boads... one is labeled
"scroll lock".

For the development board, I'd actually prefer to assign some
reasonable functions. If vendor BSP uses the LEDs for disk and network
indicators (for example) I'd just mark it as a disk and network
LEDs...

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)