On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 02:35:08PM -0700, Zev Weiss wrote: > On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 01:49:12PM PDT, Mark Brown wrote: > > For example if the output comes out on a socket then that socket should > > be described. > Okay -- in the case of an Open19 power shelf like the ahe-50dc, there are 50 > instances of this, 48 of which are in four ganged connectors each with 12 > pairs of pins, but two of which have their own dedicated little individual > sockets. The connectors are physically different, but they're all identical > as far as software is concerned, so I'm not clear on why it would need to be > expressed in any DT properties or the like. Or did you just mean > explanatory free-form text in the description field? Explanatory description would be one example of something that should be described, yes - if there is control for switching the supplies on and off the user is going to need to be able to figure out which software control corresponds to which physical connection. Other devices may have more things that need autoamtion (eg, jack detection). > > Sure, but there's no reason why it can't scale down to something > > simpler. It's easier to support something simpler than have to extend > > to support something more complicated. > Alright, so would you suggest creating something like > drivers/extcon/extcon-regulator-output.c, and just having its extcon > functionality be something of a stub for now? I'm not super familiar with extcon but that seems plausible.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
