Jacek On 09/11/2018 01:27 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > Dan, > > On 09/10/2018 09:51 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >> Jacek >> >> On 09/10/2018 02:07 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>> Dan, Pavel, >>> >>> On 09/10/2018 04:37 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >>>> Jacek >>>> >>>> On 09/08/2018 02:53 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>>>> Dan, >>>>> >>>>> On 09/07/2018 03:52 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And I think Jacek pointed out that the bindings references in this bindings >>>>>>>> don't even exist. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am thinking we need to deprecate this MFD driver and consolidate these drivers >>>>>>>> in the LED directory as we indicated before. I did not find any ti-lmu support >>>>>>>> code. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ti-lmu common core code and then the LED children appending the feature differentiation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Need some maintainer weigh in here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hehe. I'm maintnainer. Fun. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know. I want to see if there was any other opinion. Especially for the LED driver. >>>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> I have a question - is this lm3697 LED controller a cell of some MFD >>>>> device? Or is it a self-contained chip? >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is a self contained chip. And the LM3697 only function is a LED driver. >>>> It does not have any other special functions like the LM363X drivers for GPIO and Regulator support. >>> >>> This is an argument for merging it as a standalone LED class driver >>> then. It is even more justifiable, taking into account uncertainties >>> related to the proper way of adding the support for it to the existing >>> MFD driver, whereas the code reuse would be the only advantage of having >>> thus support in MFD subsystem. >>> >> >> Does the argument carry over to the other devices? > > If we want to be consequent - yes. > >> Like the LM3632 (part of the ti-lmu) has flash and torch and no other special functions >> so it would look like the lm3601x family with different register mappings. > > Yes, this is obvious candidate for LED class flash driver. > >> The LM3631 seems to also be just a LED driver with no extra functionality >> >> I could go buy an EVM and put together a driver for that device as well using the lm3601x as >> reference. > > I'm not going to encourage you to make this expense, but to put it > politically - I'd happily welcome those drivers in the LED subsystem ;-) > Understood. I am waiting on hardware to test. Dan -- ------------------ Dan Murphy
