Hi, On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 5:13 PM, David Collins <collinsd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/02/2018 09:37 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:50 PM, David Collins <collinsd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> +- vdd_l26-supply >>> +- vdd_lvs1_lvs2-supply >>> +- vdd_lvs1_lvs2-supply >>> + Usage: optional (PM8998 only) >>> + Value type: <phandle> >>> + Definition: phandle of the parent supply regulator of one or more of the >>> + regulators for this PMIC. >> >> One small additional nit here is that "vdd_lvs1_lvs2-supply" is listed twice. > > I'll remove the duplicate. > > >> Also on the schematics (and in the PM8998 datasheet) I have this is >> "VIN_LVS_1_2". It seems like you should be consistent here and call >> this "vin-lvs-1-2-supply". > > I was trying to keep the naming consistent within device tree binding > documentation for LVS vs LDO and SMPS (e.g. 'vdd' vs 'vin' prefix). I > suppose that I can change this to match the hardware documentation pin > name. I can also change '_' to '-' in the supply names if that is preferred. I'd rather it match the docs. I personally have no idea for why the writer of the docs used "vdd" vs. "vin", but even if they had no good reason matching the docs makes this searchable. As far as the "_" to "-", Rob asked for that earlier in this thread and you says "I will change this on the next patch set." In general the desire to convert "_" to "-" makes this less searchable (since the docs use "_"), but that's the way device tree guys want it so so c'est la vie. Luckily it's easily to mentally change the "-"s back to "_"s when searching... -Doug -- 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
