[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6586096d.df0a0220.1a02f.6ace@mx.google.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:09:21 +0100
From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: net: phy: Document new LEDs
polarity property
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:34:41AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > I do worry this continues to evolve until we've re-created the pinctrl
> > binding...
>
> Hi Rob
>
> What is you opinion of the pinctrl binding? Should we just copy parts
> of it?
>
Hi,
I have the new series ready but I'm not sure pincfg-node have useful
property.
What we should use from there? From what I can see only output-low would
be useful to us. I didn't find a way to handle the inactive mode.
Should I send the new series so we can continue the discussion there or
better to wait for Rob feedback?
--
Ansuel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists