Re: [PATCH/RFC v8 11/14] DT: Add documentation for the mfd Maxim max77693

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >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.

Ok.

> >>+- 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
> binding.

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?
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(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/