On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri 30 Oct 11:42 PDT 2015, Lee Jones wrote: > > Rob, please see the discussion regarding ti,boost-freq-khz below. Should > we both specify unit at the same time as we use standard units? (This is > not the first time I have to change this back and forth) > >> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >> > [..] >> > +- ti,hwen-gpios: >> > + Usage: required >> > + Value type: <prop-encoded-array> >> > + Definition: reference to gpio pin connected to the HWEN input; as >> > + specified in "gpio/gpio.txt" >> >> Why have you made this a vendor binding? >> >> *-gpios is a generic property. >> > > Because the hwen gpio is a ti lm3533 specific thing, but I get what > you're saying. Will drop the prefix. Actually, that is fine. -gpios is common, but the rest is specific to a binding. But if it is a common function, then a common name would be fine. Enable gpios are common for example. >> > +- ti,als-supply: >> > + Usage: optional >> > + Value type: <prop-encoded-array> >> > + Definition: reference to regulator powering the V_als input; as >> > + specified in "regulator/regulator.txt" >> >> Same goes for *-supply. >> > > Same here > >> > +- ti,boost-freq-khz: >> > + Usage: required >> > + Value type: <u32> >> > + Definition: switch-frequency of the boost converter, must be either: >> > + 500 or 1000 >> >> Quite a few vendors are using 'boost' now. >> > > The ti,boost-low-freq from the bq25890 binding is the only other > property I can find that describes the same thing. So I'm not sure I > follow you here. > >> Perhaps we need to create a set of generic bindings. >> >> Also, we usually measure DT bindings in HZ, not kHz. Surprisingly, there are not enough examples to draw much conclusion. > I thought we had defined frequencies to be in HZ and HZ only, but then > Rob's comment that I need to actually specify the unit doesn't make any > sense. I don't think we decided, but let's decide now. Go with Hz. Really, I first prefer the property name has units and second having standardized units. But if there is a common property without units, I prefer that even more. > Do we want these properties in a standard unit or do we want them > specifying the unit? Having both seems excessive. You mean "freq" would imply the units? No, we want the actual units in the property. Rob -- 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
