Quoting Konrad Dybcio (2025-02-06 03:30:50) > On 6.02.2025 12:30 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/chrome/google,pogo-pin-connector.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/chrome/google,pogo-pin-connector.yaml > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..622e171b6b08 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/chrome/google,pogo-pin-connector.yaml > > @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) > > +%YAML 1.2 > > +--- > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/chrome/google,pogo-pin-connector.yaml# > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > + > > +title: Google Pogo Pin Connector > > This looks like a very generic piece of hw.. many boards (esp. convertibles) > do the same thing, with 4 or 5 pins on the bottom of the device. Yes, connectors are basically just pins :-) > > But of course hw manufacturers being hw manufacturers, many different kinds > of signals go through such connectors - if it's not USB then it's perhaps > I2C or some variation thereof Right, and I doubt they call them "pogo". > > IMO, we could perhaps add this to usb-connector.yaml as "usb-custom-connector" > or so Do you have a device that could use such a generic binding? I can't really design something in the abstract without two or more concrete use cases. Coming up with something generic looks like a quagmire, because as you say the signals going through the pins could be anything: i2c, 1-wire, etc. At least this is a vendor prefixed binding, meaning a generic binding could supersede this one later. The risk of accepting this binding is low because it can be replaced by a more generic one at a later date. I will move the file to usb/ so that it is more likely to be seen, but I'm hesitant to sign up to work on any sort of generic binding for USB2 plus an extra pin used for who knows what.
