On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Alban Bedel <alban.bedel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Alban Bedel <alban.bedel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-level-shifter.txt | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-level-shifter.txt > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-level-shifter.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-level-shifter.txt > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..e108c43 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-level-shifter.txt > @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ > +GPIO level shifter > + > +This binding allow supporting GPIOs going though a level shifter. > + > +Required properties: > +- compatible : should be "gpio-level-shifter" > +- data-gpios : list of the data GPIO phandles > +- #gpio-cells : should be 2 > +- gpio-controller : marks the device node as a GPIO controller > + > +Optional properties: > +- enable-gpio : phandle of the GPIO that control the level shifter enable pin > +- direction-gpio : phandle of the GPIO that control the level shifter direction What if you had 2 level shifters with a common enable, but with different directions? We'd have to support an ORing of the enable state. That's largely a gpio subsystem problem I guess. Otherwise, this looks pretty good to me: Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> Rob > +- vcca-supply : phandle of the regulator for side A of the level shifter > +- vccb-supply : phandle of the regulator for side B of the level shifter > -- > 2.1.3 > -- 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
