On 24/06/2024 15:06, Vicentiu Galanopulo wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 07:02:12AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 23/06/2024 23:02, Vicentiu Galanopulo wrote: >>> The LED1202 is a 12-channel low quiescent current LED driver with: >>> * Supply range from 2.6 V to 5 V >>> * 20 mA current capability per channel >>> * 1.8 V compatible I2C control interface >>> * 8-bit analog dimming individual control >>> * 12-bit local PWM resolution >>> * 8 programmable patterns >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Vicentiu Galanopulo <vicentiu.galanopulo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> Changes in v2: >>> - renamed label to remove color from it >>> - add color property for each node >>> - add function and function-enumerator property for each node >> >> Fix your email setup, because your broken or non-existing threading >> messes with review process. See: >> >> b4 diff '<ZniNdGgKyUMV-hjq@admins-Air>' >> Grabbing thread from >> lore.kernel.org/all/ZniNdGgKyUMV-hjq@admins-Air/t.mbox.gz >> Checking for older revisions >> Grabbing search results from lore.kernel.org >> Added from v1: 1 patches >> --- >> Analyzing 3 messages in the thread >> Looking for additional code-review trailers on lore.kernel.org >> Preparing fake-am for v1: dt-bindings: leds: Add LED1202 LED Controller >> ERROR: v1 series incomplete; unable to create a fake-am range >> --- >> Could not create fake-am range for lower series v1 >> >> >>> >>> .../devicetree/bindings/leds/st,led1202.yml | 162 ++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 162 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/st,led1202.yml >> >> yaml, not yml > ok, will change >> >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/st,led1202.yml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/st,led1202.yml >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 000000000000..1484b09c8eeb >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/st,led1202.yml >>> @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause >>> +%YAML 1.2 >>> +--- >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/leds/st,led1202.yaml# >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>> + >>> +title: ST LED1202 LED controllers >>> + >>> +maintainers: >>> + - Vicentiu Galanopulo <vicentiu.galanopulo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> + >>> +description: >>> + The LED1202 is a 12-channel low quiescent current LED controller >>> + programmable via I2C; The output current can be adjusted separately >>> + for each channel by 8-bit analog and 12-bit digital dimming control. >>> + >>> + Datasheet available at >>> + https://www.st.com/en/power-management/led1202.html >>> + >>> +properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + enum: >>> + - st,led1202 >>> + >>> + reg: >>> + maxItems: 1 >>> + >>> + "#address-cells": >>> + const: 1 >>> + >>> + "#size-cells": >>> + const: 0 >>> + >>> +patternProperties: >>> + "^led@[0-9a-f]+$": >>> + type: object >>> + $ref: common.yaml# >>> + unevaluatedProperties: false >>> + >>> + properties: >>> + reg: >>> + minimum: 0 >>> + maximum: 11 >>> + >>> + required: >>> + - reg >>> + >>> +additionalProperties: false >>> + >>> +examples: >>> + - | >>> + #include <dt-bindings/leds/common.h> >>> + >>> + i2c { >>> + #address-cells = <1>; >>> + #size-cells = <0>; >>> + >>> + led-controller@58 { >>> + compatible = "st,led1202"; >>> + reg = <0x58>; >>> + address-cells = <1>; >>> + size-cells = <0>; >>> + >>> + led@0 { >>> + reg = <0>; >>> + label = "led1"; >>> + function = LED_FUNCTION_STATUS; >>> + color = <LED_COLOR_ID_RED>; >>> + function-enumerator = <1>; >>> + active = <1>; >> >> This did not improve. First, which binding defines this field? >> > it's a new field I added, but if you would like for me to use another > please advise. Look at the LED bindings. Anyway, you cannot sprinkle new properties to some nodes without defining them in the bindings. > Depending on this value, the enabled/disabled bit is set in the > appropriate register, and the led appears with the label name in sysfs. > Hope this extra info helps in helping me pick the appropiate binding. > >> Second this was never tested. >> > are you referring to the automated test done by the kernel test robot? No, your testing. See writing-schema doc. > > >> Third, where did you give me any chance to reply to your comment before >> posting new version? >> > I think I have a wrong understanding of the process or mutt client is missconfigured > or missued on my side. Sending new version of patchset without allowing me to respond is not "mutt misconfiguration". Best regards, Krzysztof
