Hi Matt, On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:07:32PM -0800, Matt Ranostay wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:20:02PM -0800, Matt Ranostay wrote: > >> Depends-On: http://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=148392292830015&w=2 > >> Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Matt Ranostay <matt@ranostay.consulting> > >> --- > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/bq27xxx.txt | 8 ++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/bq27xxx.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/bq27xxx.txt > >> index b0c95ef63e68..0472a2db0f13 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/bq27xxx.txt > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/bq27xxx.txt > >> @@ -28,9 +28,17 @@ Required properties: > >> * "ti,bq27621" - BQ27621 > >> - reg: integer, i2c address of the device. > >> > >> +Optional properties: > >> +- monitored-battery: phandle of battery information devicetree node > > > > We need a common way to describe charger/monitor to battery connections, > > not yet another way. The battery and power supply related bindings are a > > bit of a mess from what I've looked at. > > Sebastian, your thoughts here? On what part? Did you receive my comment on patch 1 from this patchset? There I wrote basically the same: > I think we should mandate the property name of the phandle in the > generic binding instead of each potential fuel-gauge/charger. > Maybe something like the following paragraph: > > Batteries are supposed to be referenced by chargers and/or > fuel-gauges using a phandle. The phandle's property should > be named "monitored-battery". If you mean the second sentence: Yes, DT bindings for the power-supply subsystem are a mess unfortunately. It's partially my fault, but the (IMHO) really bad ones were already there when I took over the power-supply subsystem (e.g. charger-manager, which does not even describe real HW). One of the problems is, that the power-supply subsystem does not know about the difference between a fuel-gauge and a battery, since smart batteries contain a fuel-gauge. Regarding the phandles: We do have a standard property for the battery <-> charger connection, which is described in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/power_supply.txt Like most of the power-supply subsystem it expects, that battery is a smart-battery with fuel-gauge. It does not really fit for the battery <-> fuel-gauge connection, though. TLDR: I suggest you implement the changes suggested by me and Rob in patch 1 and resend the patch series. Then let's see if Rob is ok with it. -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
