[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <046b289d-b6a5-45f9-88b1-090e2ab7c95d@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 09:33:42 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hansg@...nel.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
Aleksandrs Vinarskis <alex@...arskis.com>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
Daniel Thompson <danielt@...nel.org>, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhiblot@...phandler.com>,
Jacopo Mondi <jacopo@...ndi.org>, Sakari Ailus
<sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] dt-bindings: leds: commonize leds property
Hi,
On 8-Sep-25 09:20, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 9/8/25 1:18 AM, Aleksandrs Vinarskis wrote:
>> A number of existing schemas use 'leds' property to provide
>> phandle-array of LED(s) to the consumer. Additionally, with the
>> upcoming privacy-led support in device-tree, v4l2 subnode could be a
>> LED consumer, meaning that all camera sensors should support 'leds'
>> and 'led-names' property via common 'video-interface-devices.yaml'.
>>
>> To avoid dublication, commonize 'leds' property from existing schemas
>> to newly introduced 'led-consumer.yaml'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aleksandrs Vinarskis <alex@...arskis.com>
>> ---
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> + leds:
>> + minItems: 1
>> + maxItems: 1
>
> My brain compiler suggests this will throw a warning (minItems should
> be redundant in this case)
>> +
>> + led-names:
>> + enum:
>> + - privacy-led
>
> Nit: "privacy" makes more sense without the suffix, as we inherently
> know this is supposed to be an LED
Note "privacy-led" as name is already used on the x86/ACPI side and
the code consuming this will be shared.
With that said if there is a strong preference for going with just
"privacy" the x86 side can be adjusted since the provider-info is
generated through a LED lookup table on the x86/ACPI side. So we can
just modify both the lookup table generation as well as the already
existing led_get(dev, "privacy-led") call to use just "privacy"
without problems.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists