On Wednesday, September 10th, 2025 at 10:35, Konrad Dybcio
<konrad.dyb...@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 9/9/25 10:39 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 9-Sep-25 6:57 PM, Aleksandrs Vinarskis wrote:
> >
> > > On Monday, September 8th, 2025 at 01:18, Aleksandrs Vinarskis
> > > a...@vinarskis.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Introduce common generic led consumer binding, where consumer defines
> > > > led(s) by phandle, as opposed to trigger-source binding where the
> > > > trigger source is defined in led itself.
> > > >
> > > > Add already used in some schemas 'leds' parameter which expects
> > > > phandle-array. Additionally, introduce 'led-names' which could be used
> > > > by consumers to map LED devices to their respective functions.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Aleksandrs Vinarskis a...@vinarskis.com
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > .../devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml | 89
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml
> > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index
> > > > 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..d50a3850f6336e9e3a52eb1374e36ea50de27f47
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-consumer.yaml
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
> > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > > +---
> > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/leds/leds-consumer.yaml#
> > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > > > +
> > > > +title: Common leds consumer
> > > > +
> > > > +maintainers:
> > > > + - Aleksandrs Vinarskis a...@vinarskis.com
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > +description:
> > > > + Some LED defined in DT are required by other DT consumers, for example
> > > > + v4l2 subnode may require privacy or flash LED. Unlike trigger-source
> > > > + approach which is typically used as 'soft' binding, referencing LED
> > > > + devices by phandle makes things simpler when 'hard' binding is
> > > > desired.
> > > > +
> > > > + Document LED properties that its consumers may define.
> > > > +
> > > > +select: true
> > > > +
> > > > +properties:
> > > > + leds:
> > > > + oneOf:
> > > > + - type: object
> > > > + - $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array
> > > > + description:
> > > > + A list of LED device(s) required by a particular consumer.
> > > > + items:
> > > > + maxItems: 1
> > > > +
> > > > + led-names:
> > >
> > > While going over the feedback I realized `leds` and `led-names` do
> > > not follow `property`, `property-names` convention. Any objections
> > > if I rename `led-names` to `leds-names` for consistency?
> >
> > No objections from me, `leds-names` indeed is better.
>
>
> FWIW we have "clocks"/"clock-names", "resets"/"reset-names" etc.
>
> I sometimes refer to "property"/"property-names" during review to
> bring attention to the preferred style (ordering of such entries),
> which is maybe what confused you
Hmm fair. Just thought 'led-names' looks a bit ugly under 'leds'. But
you are right, since there are already "clocks"/"clock-names",
"resets"/"reset-names", lets keep it that way.
Thanks for clarification,
Alex
>
> Konrad
