Re: [PATCH] leds: implement OpenFirmare GPIO LED driver

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 07:59:03AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/Documentation/powerpc/dts-bindings/gpio/led.txt  

b/Documentation/powerpc/dts-bindings/gpio/led.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7e9ce81

--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/powerpc/dts-bindings/gpio/led.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+LED connected to GPIO
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible : should be "gpio-led".

This "compatible" name is a bit too generic.  No, I don't know a
better name :-(

quoted

+- label : (optional) the label for this LED. If omitted, the label is
+  taken from the node name (excluding the unit address).

What is a label? 

The label that is written on the board for this particular LED, or
the label that hardware documentation refers to.

It should be described here.  Also, its encoding
should be described ("a string" I guess).

Yes.

quoted

+- gpios : should specify LED GPIO.
+
+Example:
+
+led@0 {
+	compatible = "gpio-led";
+	label = "hdd";
+	gpios = <&mcu_pio 0 0>;
+};

You show a unit address but have no "reg" value.  This is
incorrect.

Hm.. how could I enumerate them then? Or should I just give them the
full names, i.e. "led-hdd" or something?

What would be the parent node of this, btw?

This is tricky question. Personally I place them inside the gpio
controller node that is responsible for the LED. But I think placing the
led nodes at top level would be also fine (maybe with "leds { }" node as
a parent for all board's LEDs. What would you suggest for a "best
practice"?

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2