Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220825094132.1268174-1-s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
 <20220825094132.1268174-3-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> <CACRpkdYL24cJgo9F1nWYzP=8+XywdUXhSedJRQFJ16MUAx7-dQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220829144032.GC24324@pengutronix.de>
In-Reply-To: <20220829144032.GC24324@pengutronix.de>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 31 Aug 2022 14:40:13 +0200
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbA3FR_sFrj9FTH3Ui8so-j654wm=5yTMUydZttsU_HMw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: gpio: Add gpio-latch binding document
To:     Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc:     linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>, kernel@pengutronix.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:40 PM Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> wrote:

> > Hm I wanted to just call these "gpios" but that is maybe confusing.
> > What about "latch-gpios"?
>
> Hm, the clk input is used to latch the current state of the inputs to
> the outputs, so "latch-gpios" might even be confused with the GPIO
> routed to the clk unput of the latch.  Overall, the whole thing is a
> latch, so "latch-gpios" doesn't sound like a good name to distinguish
> the different types of inputs of a latch.  I still like data-gpios best
> as these lines are described as "Data inputs" in my 74273 data sheet.

How about "latched-gpios" (notice the "d")

It makes some semantic sense.

But I will not nitpick, data is fine, just a bit unspecific.

Yours,
Linus Walleij