Re: [PATCH/RFC v8 11/14] DT: Add documentation for the mfd Maxim max77693
From: Pavel Machek
Date: Mon Dec 01 2014 - 08:02:38 EST
> >Is this one needed? Just ommit child note if it is not there.
> It is needed because you can have one led connected two both
> outputs. This allows to describe such a design.
> >>+- maxim,trigger-type : Array of trigger types in order: flash, torch
> >>+ Possible trigger types:
> >>+ 0 - Rising edge of the signal triggers the flash/torch,
> >>+ 1 - Signal level controls duration of the flash/torch.
> >>+- maxim,trigger : Array of flags indicating which trigger can activate given led
> >>+ in order: fled1, fled2
> >>+ Possible flag values (can be combined):
> >>+ 1 - FLASH pin of the chip,
> >>+ 2 - TORCH pin of the chip,
> >>+ 4 - software via I2C command.
> >Is it good idea to have bitfields like this?
> >Make these required properties of the subnode?
> This is related to a single property: trigger. I think that splitting
> it to three properties would make unnecessary noise in the
Well, maybe it is not that much noise, and you'll have useful names
(not a bitfield).
Should these properties move to the LED subnode?
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/