[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3c555cae-999f-ccd2-d114-00b92abd19ba@denx.de>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:01:44 +0100
From: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Christoph Niedermaier <cniedermaier@...electronics.com>
Cc: Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
kernel <kernel@...electronics.com>,
"linux-leds@...r.kernel.org" <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: leds: Mark label property as deprecated
On 12/22/22 14:50, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>>>> This part I understand. What is not clear to me is, why is 'label' being
>>>> un-deprecated.
>>>
>>> It shouldn't be. It seems to be Pavel's ad-hoc decision.
>>
>> Is there a majority agreement that the "label" property remains
>> deprecated?
>
>
>> If so, I would say we can mark the label as deprecated.
>>
>> On the other hand, the new generated standardized sysfs name does not seem
>> to provide a full replacement for the "label" property.
>> What is still missing?
>
> Having reasonable naming of the LEDs is pre-requisite for deprecating
> label property.
As far as I can tell, function and function-enumerator is the reasonable
naming. Jacek seem to confirm that. I would say, label can be deprecated
. What is the counter-argument for why it should NOT be deprecated ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists