Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
Date:   Fri, 13 Oct 2023 19:12:18 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>,
        Ivan Mikhaylov <fr0st61te@gmail.com>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: adc: provide max34408/9 device tree
 binding document
Message-ID: <20231013191218.26cbe06a@jic23-huawei>
In-Reply-To: <9996a912-7b4e-4247-bb8a-716782fbcc2a@linaro.org>
References: <20231007234838.8748-1-fr0st61te@gmail.com>
        <20231007234838.8748-2-fr0st61te@gmail.com>
        <20231010154042.2ef667b2@jic23-huawei>
        <383064a5b0863a4a616cd60cff8d4bc18e397fd7.camel@gmail.com>
        <20231012084052.504ac930@jic23-huawei>
        <e7b74daa9d0131246fd10f47aa4128bc8f8f3177.camel@gmail.com>
        <20231013091952.00002573@Huawei.com>
        <2eafa89c-7c95-4bc1-85cb-a6d7417dcea8@linaro.org>
        <20231013100930.000043b2@Huawei.com>
        <9996a912-7b4e-4247-bb8a-716782fbcc2a@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 11:53:33 +0200
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 13/10/2023 11:09, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >>>>>>>> +=C2=A0 shtdn-enable-gpios:=C2=A0      =20
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I guess the review crossed with you sending v5.=C2=A0 There is so=
me
> >>>>>>> feedback on v4 you need
> >>>>>>> to address here.=C2=A0      =20
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jonathan, I thought I did, I've changed ena to powerdown-gpios from
> >>>>>> Krzysztof's comments but about this one pin I'm still not sure, it
> >>>>>> looks like *-enable-gpios (like in *-enable-gpios pins in
> >>>>>> iio/frequency/adi,adf4377.yaml) pin or is it not? Or maybe any
> >>>>>> other
> >>>>>> suggestions about naming of this one?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks.     =20
> >>>>>
> >>>>> shutdown-gpios and make the sense (active high / low) such that
> >>>>> setting
> >>>>> it results in teh device being shut down.
> >>>>> Or treat it as an enable and enable-gpios
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Something that indicates both shutdown and enable is confusing ;)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jonathan     =20
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Jonathan, then I make these changes:
> >>>>
> >>>> powerdown-gpios: -> output-enable:   =20
> >>> Needs to retain the gpios bit as we want the standard gpio stuff to p=
ick
> >>> them up. I'm not that keen on output-enable-gpios though.  The activi=
ty
> >>> here is very much 'shutdown because of error or not enabled' I think.
> >>> So perhaps we flip the sense and document that it needs to be active =
low?
> >>>    =20
> >>>> shtdn-enable-gpios: -> enable-gpios:
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it ok?   =20
> >>>
> >>> Conor, Rob, Krzysztof - you probably have a better insight into this =
than
> >>> I do.
> >>>    =20
> >>
> >> "enable-gpios" are for turning on a specific feature, not powering
> >> on/off entire device. For example to enable regulator output.
> >>
> >> "powerdown-gpios" are for turning device on/off.
> >>
> >> I don't know what do you have in your device. =20
> > Ok. Sounds like that what is enable-gpios above should be shutdown-gpio=
s. =20
>=20
> shutdown-gpios sounds exactly the same as powerdown-gpios and it is
> already used in exactly same context.
Oops. Yup. powerdown-gpios seems appropriate.
>=20
> > The other case is a device output indicating whether the device is
> > shutdown.  That can happen because it was told to do so (via the other =
gpio),
> > or because it is in an error state. What's a good naming convention for=
 that? =20
>=20
> There is no convention and I did not see such case so far.
> powerdown-status-gpios? powerdown-state-gpios?
Either seems reasonable.

Thanks,

J
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>=20