Re: [PATCH 0/3] add dt configuration for dp83867 led modes

[Alexander Stein]

Hello Ansuel,

Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2022, 19:38:36 CET schrieb Christian Marangi:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 10:35:46AM -0800, Tim Harvey wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 10:31 AM Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@xxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 10:26:09AM -0800, Tim Harvey wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 3:35 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 11:57:00AM -0800, Tim Harvey wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 5:11 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> 
wrote:
> > > > > > > > Andrew,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I completely agree with you but I haven't seen how that can be
> > > > > > > > done
> > > > > > > > yet. What support exists for a PHY driver to expose their LED
> > > > > > > > configuration to be used that way? Can you point me to an
> > > > > > > > example?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Nobody has actually worked on this long enough to get code
> > > > > > > merged. e.g.
> > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20201004095852.GB1104@bug/T/
> > > > > > > https://lists.archive.carbon60.com/linux/kernel/3396223
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > This is probably the last attempt, which was not too far away
> > > > > > > from getting merged:
> > > > > > > https://patches.linaro.org/project/linux-leds/cover/20220503151
> > > > > > > 633.18760-1-ansuelsmth@xxxxxxxxx/
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I seem to NACK a patch like yours every couple of months. If all
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > wasted time was actually spent on a common framework, this would
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > been solved years ago.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > How important is it to you to control these LEDs? Enough to
> > > > > > > finish
> > > > > > > this code and get it merged?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Andrew,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks for the links - the most recent attempt does look
> > > > > > promising.
> > > > > > For whatever reason I don't have that series in my mail history so
> > > > > > it's not clear how I can respond to it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > apt-get install b4
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Ansuel, are you planning on posting a v7 of 'Adds support for PHY
> > > > > > LEDs
> > > > > > with offload triggers' [1]?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm not all that familiar with netdev led triggers. Is there a way
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > configure the default offload blink mode via dt with your series?
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > didn't quite follow how the offload function/blink-mode gets set.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The idea is that the PHY LEDs are just LEDs in the Linux LED
> > > > > framework. So read
> > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/common.yaml.
> > > > > The PHY should make use of these standard DT properties, including
> > > > > linux,default-trigger.
> > > > > 
> > > > >         Andrew
> > > > 
> > > > Ansuel,
> > > > 
> > > > Are you planning on posting a v7 of 'Adds support for PHY LEDs with
> > > > offload triggers' [1]?
> > > > 
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > 
> > > > Tim
> > > > [1] https://patches.linaro.org/project/linux-leds/list/?series=174704
> > > 
> > > I can consider that only if there is a real interest for it and would
> > > love some help by the netdev team to actually have a review from the
> > > leds team...
> > > 
> > > I tried multiple time to propose it but I never got a review... only a
> > > review from an external guy that wanted to follow his idea in every way
> > > possible with the only intention of applying his code (sorry to be rude
> > > about that but i'm more than happy to recover the work and search for a
> > > common solution)
> > > 
> > > So yes this is still in my TODO list but it would help if others can
> > > tell me that they want to actually review it. That would put that
> > > project on priority and I would recover and push a v7.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 
> > >         Ansuel
> > 
> > Ansuel,
> > 
> > Considering Andrew is nak'ing any phy code to configure LED's until a
> > solution using via /sys/class/leds is provided I would say there is
> > real interest.
> > 
> > It seems to me that you got very positive feedback for this last
> > series. I would think if you submitted without RFC it would catch more
> > eyes as well.
> 
> Well yes that's the fun part. netdev really liked the concept and how it
> was implemented (and actually also liked the use of a dedicated trigger
> instead of bloating the netdev trigger)
> 
> But I never got a review from LED team and that result in having the
> patch stalled and never merged... But ok I will recover the work and
> recheck/retest everything from the start hoping to get more traction
> now...

I was just trying to use your RFC patchset from May 2022 for dp83867 as well, 
with some success at least.
I have some comments, fixes and uncertainties. How do you want to progress? 
Resend so I can rebase on that? Anyway, put me on CC.

Best regards,
Alexander