Hi, On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 02:10:37PM +0100, Quentin Schulz wrote: > Hi Liam, > > On 15/03/2017 13:08, Liam Breck wrote: > > I dropped most of the CCs, pls re-add anyone essential. Use Cc lines > > in patch description to direct a patch to interested parties and > > relevant lists. I don't want to see all 19 patches in this series. > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:55 AM, Quentin Schulz > > <quentin.schulz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> This adds the constant-charge-current property to the list of optional > >> properties of the battery. > >> > >> The constant charge current is critical for batteries as they can't > >> handle all charge currents. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> > >> v4: > >> - switch from constant-charge-current-microamp to constant-charge-microamp, > > > > Must be constant-charge-current-microamp for the reasons discussed in > > battery.txt - consistency with sysfs names. > > > > Hum. Just nitpicking, but I disagree with the use of 'must'. IIRC there > is nothing in the code that would require the property to be named after > a property from the enum power_supply_property. > > I would say that you _want_ it to be named like that because it > underlines the relation between the DT property and the actual impacted > property in the power supply subsystem. I'm fine with this reason but in > the end, the maintainer's opinion prevails (if (s)he does not want it, > (s)he will not take it). So, basically, I actually don't mind either > option and I see arguments on each side. > > So, just waiting for maintainer's opinion to make the final version of > this patch. I'm fine with either property names. -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
