> So in this case, the amber LED indicates the link activity, and the green > LED indicates the link status. AFAICT we still do not have function names > defined for those, the closest I can think is to do: > > function = LED_FUNCTION_ACTIVITY for the amber LED > > and for the green LED: > > function = (LED_FUNCTION_RX | LED_FUNCTION_TX) > > is that acceptable? I have a WIP DT binding for exact meaning of the LED. https://github.com/lunn/linux v6.5-rc4-net-next-led-bindings It is too late for this merge window, so i will likely post it as an RFC in a weeks time. We probably need a discussion, LED_FUNCTION_LAN gives the high level description, and contributes to the naming, and then this binding gives the specific meaning of the LED? Or do we want to define LED_FUNCTION_* for details? Andrew
