On 6.02.2025 9:43 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:

Quoting Konrad Dybcio (2025-02-06 03:30:50)

quoted

On 6.02.2025 12:30 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

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 :-)

quoted

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".

quoted

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.

Right, we can't be overly generic either. FWIW I'm not standing in the way
of this patch getting merged.

Konrad

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.