On Fri 06 May 23:36 PDT 2022, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > As such the pattern sequence provided to hw_pattern looks to be the > > > > smae, but I don't see that it can be made compatible. > > > > > > > > > Can I get either patch to disable pattern infrastructure for now or to > > > > > get it compatible? > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd be happy to get this updated to your liking, but this was one of the > > > > drivers we discussed when we introduced the pattern trigger and led to > > > > the conclusion that we need the ability to do hw-specific patterns. > > > > > > > > As such this document provides the hardware specific documentation, as > > > > we describe under "hw_pattern" in > > > > Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-led-trigger-pattern. > > > > > > > > Please advice on what you would like me to do. > > > > > > I'd like you to use same format leds-trigger-pattern describes. > > > > > > If someone passes "255 500 0 500", that's requesting gradual transitions and > > > your hw can not do that. You return -EINVAL. > > > > > > If someone wants that kind of blinking, they need to pass "255 0 255 500 0 0 0 500". > > > > > > > So the section under hw_pattern in sysfs-class-led-trigger-pattern that > > says: > > > > "Since different LED hardware can have different semantics of > > hardware patterns, each driver is expected to provide its own > > description for the hardware patterns in their documentation > > file at Documentation/leds/." > > > > That doesn't apply to this piece of hardware & driver? > > It applies: since your hardware can not do arbitrary patterns, you > need description of what kinds of patterns it can do. > > But you should still use compatible format, so that pattern that is > valid for hw_pattern file is valid for pattern file, too, and produces > same result. > Okay, I didn't understand that the hw_pattern needs to be a subset of the pattern. I will prepare a patch to require the pattern to include the zero-time entries as well. > If you believe documentation implies something else, it may need to be > clarified. > I'll read it again and if needed I'll try to clarify the expectations. Thanks, Bjorn
