On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:04:53PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > From: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
> >
> > The WAN port of the 370-RD has a Marvell PHY, with one LED on
> > the front panel. List this LED in the device tree.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <[email protected]>
>
> > @@ -135,6 +136,19 @@ &mdio {
> > pinctrl-names = "default";
> > phy0: ethernet-phy@0 {
> > reg = <0>;
> > + leds {
> > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > + led@0 {
> > + reg = <0>;
> > + label = "WAN";
> > + color = <LED_COLOR_ID_WHITE>;
> > + function = LED_FUNCTION_LAN;
> > + function-enumerator = <1>;
> > + linux,default-trigger = "netdev";
> > + };
> > + };
> > };
> >
>
> How will this end up looking in sysfs?

Hi Pavel

It is just a plain boring LED, so it will look like all other LEDs.
There is nothing special here.

> Should documentation be added to Documentation/leds/leds-blinkm.rst
> ?

This has nothing to do with blinkm, which appears to be an i2c LED
driver.

Andrew

2023-03-23 19:18:00

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 11:54:46PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 04:19:53PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 08:18:09PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > Document support for LEDs node in ethernet-controller.
> > > Ethernet Controller may support different LEDs that can be configured
> > > for different operation like blinking on traffic event or port link.
> > >
> > > Also add some Documentation to describe the difference of these nodes
> > > compared to PHY LEDs, since ethernet-controller LEDs are controllable
> > > by the ethernet controller regs and the possible intergated PHY doesn't
> > > have control on them.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > .../bindings/net/ethernet-controller.yaml | 21 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ethernet-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ethernet-controller.yaml
> > > index 00be387984ac..a93673592314 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ethernet-controller.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ethernet-controller.yaml
> > > @@ -222,6 +222,27 @@ properties:
> > > required:
> > > - speed
> > >
> > > + leds:
> > > + type: object
> > > + description:
> > > + Describes the LEDs associated by Ethernet Controller.
> > > + These LEDs are not integrated in the PHY and PHY doesn't have any
> > > + control on them. Ethernet Controller regs are used to control
> > > + these defined LEDs.
> > > +
> > > + properties:
> > > + '#address-cells':
> > > + const: 1
> > > +
> > > + '#size-cells':
> > > + const: 0
> > > +
> > > + patternProperties:
> > > + '^led(@[a-f0-9]+)?$':
> > > + $ref: /schemas/leds/common.yaml#
> >
> > Are specific ethernet controllers allowed to add their own properties in
> > led nodes? If so, this doesn't work. As-is, this allows any other
> > properties. You need 'unevaluatedProperties: false' here to prevent
> > that. But then no one can add properties. If you want to support that,
> > then you need this to be a separate schema that devices can optionally
> > include if they don't extend the properties, and then devices that
> > extend the binding would essentially have the above with:
> >
> > $ref: /schemas/leds/common.yaml#
> > unevaluatedProperties: false
> > properties:
> > a-custom-device-prop: ...
> >
> >
> > If you wanted to define both common ethernet LED properties and
> > device specific properties, then you'd need to replace leds/common.yaml
> > above with the ethernet one.
> >
> > This is all the same reasons the DSA/switch stuff and graph bindings are
> > structured the way they are.
> >
>
> Hi Rob, thanks for the review/questions.
>
> The idea of all of this is to keep leds node as standard as possible.
> It was asked to add unevaluatedProperties: False but I didn't understood
> it was needed also for the led nodes.
>
> leds/common.yaml have additionalProperties set to true but I guess that
> is not OK for the final schema and we need something more specific.

Yes, every node needs a schema with all possible properties and then
'unevaluatedProperties: false' to not allow any other properties.

> Looking at the common.yaml schema reg binding is missing so an
> additional schema is needed.
>
> Reg is needed for ethernet LEDs and PHY but I think we should also permit
> to skip that if the device actually have just one LED. (if this wouldn't
> complicate the implementation. Maybe some hints from Andrew about this
> decision?)
>
> If we decide that reg is a must, if I understood it correctly we should
> create something like leds-ethernet.yaml that would reference common and
> add reg binding? Is it correct? This schema should be laded in leds
> directory and not in the net/ethernet.

You need 'reg' in properties, but whether it is required or not just
depends on putting it in 'required'. I don't have a strong opinion on
that, but generally it's only use 'reg' when there's more than 1.

Rob