[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPcSUY6aqvix7R0YkzQL9Mze9O8jrWLLxKoRyjHTRhrYLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 08:54:40 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
BenoƮt Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:TI ETHERNET SWITCH DRIVER (CPSW)"
<linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/15] dt-bindings: gpio: convert bindings for NXP
PCA953x family to dtschema
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 08:42, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 8:54 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 20:28, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com> wrote:
> > > On 19:57-20200910, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > + wakeup-source:
> > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
> > > > +
> > > > +patternProperties:
> > > > + "^(hog-[0-9]+|.+-hog(-[0-9]+)?)$":
> > >
> > > I wonder if "hog" is too generic and might clash with "something-hog" in
> > > the future?
> >
> > This pattern is already used in
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/fsl-imx-gpio.yaml. It will
> > match only children and so far it did not find any other nodes in ARM
> > and ARM64 dts. I don't expect clashes. Also the question is then - if
> > one adds a child of GPIO expander named "foobar-hog" and it is not a
> > GPIO hog, then what is it?
>
> Perhaps you didn't find any other nodes as children of pca953x
> controllers?
There shouldn't be.. unless one makes some i2c-gpio controller under
such GPIO expander. But now it wouldn't be instantiated as expander is
not a bus.
> There are other hog nodes in other types of GPIO controllers. Typically
> they're named after the purpose, e.g. "wifi-disable", "i2c3_mux_oe_n",
> "pcie_sata_switch", "lcd0_mux".
>
> IMHO it's a hog if it contains a "gpio-hog" property, regardless of node
> naming.
Yes. The question is then whether to expect the "hog" in name. Just
like we expect for all other device nodes to represent the class.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists