On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 6:54 AM Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > For active low lines the semantic of output-low and output-high is hard > to grasp because there is a double negation involved and so output-low > is actually a request to drive the line high (aka inactive). > > So introduce output-inactive and output-active with the same semantic as > output-low and output-high respectively have today, but with a more > sensible name. > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Hello, > > compared to (implicit) v1, changed to ..asserted from ...active as Linus > Walleij suggested. I'm fine to apply this but would prefer if I can apply it back-to-back with a patch adding support to the kernel. I know the bindings and the OS should be decoupled in theory but ... feels better for me. Yours, Linus Walleij
