On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 04:52:33PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 12/16/22 14:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 12:30:05PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: ... > >> + /* > >> + * For named LEDs, first look up the name in the "leds-names" property. > >> + * If it cannot be found, then of_parse_phandle() will propagate the error. > >> + */ > >> + if (name) > >> + index = of_property_match_string(np, "leds-names", name); > > > > I can't find this property anywhere in the kernel. Is it new? > > Yes and no, adding a foo-names property for foo[] arrays to be > able to get members by name is a standard template for devicetree > bindings. See e.g. the clock bindings: > https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/blob/main/dtschema/schemas/clock/clock.yaml > > > If so, where is the bindings? > > As for why not document this, there are currently no devicetree users > and the devicetree maintainers have repeatedly let me know not to > submit new bindings for fwnode x86 bindings ... How above is related to fwnode as you put that? (I do see OF specific code which is required to have a binding, right?) > > And why entire code can't be converted > > to use fwnode for this case? > > This is a trivial change to allow the new functions to work > with devicetree. Note this series does not introduce any devicetree > users, hence no bindings. But it is good to have compatibility backed in > from day 1. AFAIU the OF properties must be documented from day 1. > Converting to fwnode APIs would be more involved and I cannot test > those changes. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
