On 09/24/2013 10:39 AM, Rhyland Klein wrote: > On 9/23/2013 6:05 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 09/23/2013 04:01 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote: >>> On 9/23/2013 5:53 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>> On 09/19/2013 10:18 AM, Rhyland Klein wrote: >>>>> Adding driver support for bq24735 charger chipset. >>>> >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power_supply/ti,bq24735.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power_supply/ti,bq24735.txt >> >>>>> + - ti,charge-current : Used to control and set the charging current. This value >>>>> + must follow the below guidelines: >>>>> + bit 0 - 5: Not used >>>>> + bit 6: 1 = Adds 64mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 7: 1 = Adds 128mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 8: 1 = Adds 256mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 9: 1 = Adds 512mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 10: 1 = Adds 1024mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 11: 1 = Adds 2048mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 12: 1 = Adds 4096mA of charger current >>>>> + bit 13 - 15: Not used >>>> >>>> That's a little odd. Why not just put the number of mA directly into the >>>> property unshifted? >>> >>> This is how the hw register is defined, its the literal number of mA. >>> This is cleaned up in the upcoming revision. >> >> OK. If you still want to use the raw register encoding, which seems >> reasonable, why not just say: >> >> ti,charge-current: Value for charge current register as described in the >> HW documentation. > > I had written this for v3: > > - ti,charge-current : Used to control and set the charging current. This > value must be between 128mA and 8.128A with a 64mA step resolution. The > POR value is 0x0000h. See spec for more details. > > Do you think the range is unnecessary or is it fine? It's probably fine, although I expect unnecessary. I would mention the exact register name from the spec, to make searching for it easier. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
