On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Jan Lübbe <jlu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Di, 2017-02-21 at 15:57 +0100, Richard Leitner wrote: >> >>> This is a lot of properties. Are you really finding a need for all of >> >>> them? Is this to handle h/w designers too cheap to put down the EEPROM? >> >>> Maybe better to just define an eeprom property in the format the h/w >> >>> expects. >> >> >> >> >> >> I need about 15 of these properties. I just exposed them all to dt because I >> >> thought they could be useful for somebody. >> >> >> >> Yes, these are a subset of the settings which can be configured via an >> >> external EEPROM (By strapping some pins of the hub you can select if it >> >> loads its configuration from an EEPROM or receives it via SMBus). >> >> >> >> My first thought was also to define only a byte array in dt, but IMHO these >> >> options are much more readable and convenient for everybody. I'd also be >> >> fine with removing the properties I don't need from dt. But that may lead to >> >> future patches where somebody needs some of the options not already exposed >> >> to dt. >> > >> > Okay. It's really a judgement call. If this is most of the settings, >> > then it's fine. If it was only a fraction of them, then maybe we'd >> > want to do just a byte array. Sounds like it is the former. >> >> In fact there are 6 more parameters available according to the >> datasheet. So how should I proceed here? Remove the one's I'm not using >> at the moment, leave them as they are or add the missing 6 too? > > Rob, several of these properties look more like configuration rather > than HW description ('skip-config', '*-id', 'manufacturer', 'product', > 'serial'). Is DT the right place for this? I would expect userspace to > provide the configuration. Configuration can be okay. The test I use is more who needs to set/control these properties? Would an end-user want to control them? If so, then they should be sysfs controls. If they are configuration for a particular design, then DT is fine. Given these are all typically EEPROM properties, then they aren't really end-user controls and belong in DT. 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