Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755614Ab2KZQmO (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 11:42:14 -0500 Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:40950 "EHLO mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755263Ab2KZQmK (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 11:42:10 -0500 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCHv9 1/3] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences To: Thierry Reding Cc: Alex Courbot , Alexandre Courbot , "linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org" , Stephen Warren , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , Mark Brown , Mark Zhang , Rob Herring , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Anton Vorontsov , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , David Woodhouse , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" In-Reply-To: <20121122214021.GA14771@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> References: <1353149747-31871-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <1353149747-31871-2-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <20121120215429.B621F3E1821@localhost> <13540495.epaCf4JVn9@percival> <20121122133941.24B883E129E@localhost> <20121122214021.GA14771@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:34:53 +0000 Message-Id: <20121126153453.2AA023E1AAA@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1554 Lines: 35 On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:40:21 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 01:39:41PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > [...] > > I do think that each sequence should be contained within a single > > property, but I'm open to other suggestions. > > IIRC a very early prototype did implement something like that. However > because of the resource issues this had to be string based, so that the > sequences looked somewhat like (Alex, correct me if I'm wrong): > > power-on = <"REGULATOR", "power", 1, "GPIO", "enable", 1>; > > Instead we could possibly have something like: > > power-on = <0 ® 1, > 1 &gpio 42 0 1>; Yes, that would work, although I still think it would be a good idea to split the used resources off into the gpios/pwms/regs/etc properties. > Where the first cell in each entry defines the type (0 = regulator, 1 = > GPIO) and the rest would be a regular OF specifier for the given type of > resource along with some defined parameter such as enable/disable, > voltage, delay in ms, ... I don't know if that sounds any better. It > looks sort of cryptic but it is more "in the spirit of" DT, right Grant? It is still kind of a ham-handed approach, but it does fit better with existing conventions than the hierarchy of nodes does. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/