On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:38:41PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Fri 2017-09-08 16:23:34, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > Hi Pavel, > > > > Thanks for the review. > > > > On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:17:58PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Fri 2017-09-08 15:42:13, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > > > Use integer numbers for LEDs, 0 is the flash and 1 is the indicator. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Dunno. Old code is shorter, old device tree is shorter, ... IMO both > > > versions are fine, because the LEDs are really different. Do we have > > > documentation somewhere saying that reg= should be used for this? Are > > > you doing this for consistency? > > > > Well, actually for ACPI support. :-) It requires less driver changes this > > way. See 17th and 18th patches in "[PATCH v9 00/23] Unified fwnode endpoint > > parser, async sub-device notifier support, N9 flash DTS". > > ACPI, I hate ACPI. :-D > > > A number of chips have LED binding that is aligned, see e.g. > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-bcm6328.txt . > > Ok, yes, that's common way LED controllers are handled. Usually all > the LEDs are "same", but... I presume that's the case with most LED driver chips: all the outputs are alike. > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> Thanks! -- Regards, Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ailus@xxxxxx
