Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210313032515.12590-1-cnsztl@gmail.com> <20210313032515.12590-2-cnsztl@gmail.com>
 <1f7f1a11-0b9b-b2e4-efbc-193f61d62832@arm.com> <CAOP2_TgUQH9H9vuESek7KjStxu=idaBxX=S5Q7_=Mn=D_s-=JA@mail.gmail.com>
 <67b314e7-92b9-8025-1a41-9b7da6ff2249@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <67b314e7-92b9-8025-1a41-9b7da6ff2249@arm.com>
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 Mar 2021 17:38:37 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdX9F0fgi2-N01cck=AvgtByq3sSpdgLrCu5MDrkkc-KXw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] rockchip: rk3399: Add support for FriendlyARM
 NanoPi R4S
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc:     CN_SZTL <cnsztl@gmail.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
        Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= <uwe@kleine-koenig.org>,
        Johan Jonker <jbx6244@gmail.com>,
        Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>,
        Marty Jones <mj8263788@gmail.com>,
        Jensen Huang <jensenhuang@friendlyarm.com>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

Hi Robin,

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:32 PM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> wrote:
> On 2021-03-13 13:22, CN_SZTL wrote:
> > Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> 于2021年3月13日周六 下午7:55写道：
> >>
> >> On 2021-03-13 03:25, Tianling Shen wrote:
> >>> +     gpio-leds {
> >>> +             compatible = "gpio-leds";
> >>> +             pinctrl-0 = <&lan_led_pin>, <&sys_led_pin>, <&wan_led_pin>;
> >>> +             pinctrl-names = "default";
> >>> +
> >>> +             lan_led: led-0 {
> >>> +                     gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PA1 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> >>> +                     label = "nanopi-r4s:green:lan";
> >>> +             };
> >>> +
> >>> +             sys_led: led-1 {
> >>> +                     gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> >>> +                     label = "nanopi-r4s:red:sys";
> >>> +                     default-state = "on";
> >>> +             };
> >>> +
> >>> +             wan_led: led-2 {
> >>> +                     gpios = <&gpio1 RK_PA0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> >>> +                     label = "nanopi-r4s:green:wan";
> >>> +             };
>
> Nit: (apologies for overlooking it before) there isn't an obvious
> definitive order for the LEDs, but the order here is certainly not
> consistent with anything. The most logical would probably be sys, wan,

Looks like alphabetical sort order to me ;-)

> lan since that's both in order of GPIO number and how they are
> physically positioned relative to each other on the board/case (although
> you could also argue for wan, lan, sys in that regard, depending on how
> you look at it).

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds