On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:58 AM Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I prefer the second binding (with mV -> uV), but I think it becomes > messy when temperature is added. What do you think about the > following proposal (derived from pinctrl style): > > Proposal C: > > ocv-capacity-table-temperatures = <(-10) 0 10>; > ocv-capacity-table-0 = <4185000 100>, <4113000 95>, <4066000 90>, ...; > ocv-capacity-table-1 = <4200000 100>, <4185000 95>, <4113000 90>, ...; > ocv-capacity-table-2 = <4250000 100>, <4200000 95>, <4185000 90>, ...; I think this looks very elegant. It's going to be very easy and intuitive for people who need to maintain these device trees and it will be easy to handle in centralized code for all platforms. Even with the microvolt notation. If possible could we go with this? Yours, Linus Walleij
