On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 10:16:44AM -0700, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 09:50:05AM +, NeilBrown wrote:
> > + - label: name for connector. If not given, device name is used.
> Are extcon devices ever used standalone? If so, why?
They are sometimes used for things that don't h
On 11/01/2013 04:33 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:16:44 -0700 Mark Rutland wrote:
Hi Neil,
While I'm not fundamentally opposed to this binding, I have some issues with
its current form and would not want to see this version hit mainline.
Thanks for the review.
On Fri, Nov 01
On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 10:33:23 +1100 NeilBrown wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:16:44 -0700 Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> > Hi Neil,
> >
> > While I'm not fundamentally opposed to this binding, I have some issues with
> > its current form and would not want to see this version hit mainline.
> >
>
> Tha
On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:16:44 -0700 Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi Neil,
>
> While I'm not fundamentally opposed to this binding, I have some issues with
> its current form and would not want to see this version hit mainline.
>
Thanks for the review.
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 09:50:05AM +, NeilBr
Hi Neil,
While I'm not fundamentally opposed to this binding, I have some issues with
its current form and would not want to see this version hit mainline.
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 09:50:05AM +, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> As this device is not vendor specific, I haven't included any "vendor,"
> pre
As this device is not vendor specific, I haven't included any "vendor,"
prefixes. For my model I used "regulator-gpio" which takes a similar
approach.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-gpio.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extc
6 matches
Mail list logo
