> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 05:08:38PM +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 06:55:09PM +0100, Denis Carikli wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > +Optional properties:
> > > > + - default-state: The initial state of the backlight.
> > > > + Valid values are "on", "off", and "keep".
> > > > + The "keep" setting will keep the backlight at whatever its current
> > > > + state is, without producing a glitch. The default is keep if this
> > > > + property is not present.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if "on", "off" and "keep" are a good choice for this
> > > binding. Having strings for these tristate values seems suboptimal.
> > > Other bindings have chosen a representation that, transposed to this
> > > use-case, would read something like this:
> > >
> > > - default-state: The initial state of the backlight. Valid
> > > values:
> > > - 0: off
> > > - 1: on
> > >
> > > If the "default-state" property is not present, the default
> > > will be to keep the current backlight state.
> > >
> > > Which is in fact the exact behaviour that your binding describes, but
> > > it's much more intuitive in my opinion.
> >
> > Why we cannot use GPIO bindings for active level here?
> > What a reason for "keep" state? Can this be an additional property?
>
> Default state and active level are two different things.
OK. And what is "default" state? State before "unblank"?
---
��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
