From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC686C43143 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 18:52:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E091208D9 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 18:52:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="h3dlC9PN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9E091208D9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727460AbeJCBhC (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2018 21:37:02 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com ([209.85.167.66]:37485 "EHLO mail-lf1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726293AbeJCBhC (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2018 21:37:02 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id a82-v6so2245842lfa.4; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 11:52:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h8ZRaxo66HYhdZG8+z/WI/w1O3d9MxngUdeLFT2xV6Q=; b=h3dlC9PNWO4LwPF7au/5XdlfWTgwFYbcvWqZcTkMfW+wxKnAlPhVVhz8Zgvje6TtGp D4P/ms745DW83yW158wHrfCl3iSdEjM4rlDjseBjUEhVcO2DC023lYd1uj+QCl4dmocH eKTreLKIYR79OaoowrRYSSaeAPd12HcT9L8C/LMvlWWOlI39GspP4HtRijIN/73Tg/um wl5O4GZqoFWK4rqyLiFBaF6X5XXfeLqz3F/BJTaRZDxVYmPA3VEUc9MpXSaaRY+dyfXj laAwIS9ngNbb4HE1miGwb0AFQ0vP9JzHxDq8bFMhyYvXaU+/gLMpob3bEzp4lYQPWWXF lmMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=h8ZRaxo66HYhdZG8+z/WI/w1O3d9MxngUdeLFT2xV6Q=; b=RC0IVtIL1gOaU5LqQ10fxwCwG+/xMPigcj5fcrVlO3nEebqxoXvqQl1L2JGc1ZSDPR 9oIAnzKhdjuvYRBJ021TSrH5fxzHqFV7AoDrXdif89lYBBD9vAYa9Hgzf1yfkigNqH05 C3QfS4dd4FnGKUOVP98OH9uZfEI98bdSRVZw7xlFqcDHfarSFoVSGNGUByyOReFdWzHf /A4U9sIHqsCV/wedGQm9zCGVMlVrMI1eNRCQjoiSUvnezRE7IywsnZIoAce7gtQ0Lpm1 /1cRJh9U7T+V3cSBS58lblKH69MVFyr2e4p50y+899ARxFZ6ymZ//SExqAEYGmRJph8A fdgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohAwhzfPcmbohy87KLEGo0p/ZQ8dGWdbuMDQKHQ38lbg6KtaUlM HZxsGau8XxaEEDulhr11m2c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV61dmT5GJTlqkpKJpfhAMLA+GHca/XXLprzEmsAmg/eNSHsOau26OdyIRDHycbiuxeXvSs/rzg== X-Received: by 2002:a19:1588:: with SMTP id 8-v6mr9468534lfv.36.1538506333542; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 11:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.18] (dkq108.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl. [83.24.20.108]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e67-v6sm3378732lfg.2.2018.10.02.11.52.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Oct 2018 11:52:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/9] leds: add TI LMU backlight driver To: Dan Murphy , Pavel Machek Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Reichel References: <20180928182954.25446-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180928182954.25446-2-dmurphy@ti.com> <20181002075629.GB19677@amd> <23dd6b46-cd16-ee67-3006-76a8dc67a7cb@ti.com> From: Jacek Anaszewski Message-ID: <0be423a9-174c-60ce-0c67-7193c6af3063@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:52:09 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <23dd6b46-cd16-ee67-3006-76a8dc67a7cb@ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/02/2018 02:32 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: > Pavel > > On 10/02/2018 02:56 AM, Pavel Machek wrote: >> On Fri 2018-09-28 13:29:46, Dan Murphy wrote: >>> From: Pavel Machek >>> >>> This adds backlight support for the following TI LMU >>> chips: LM3532, LM3631, LM3632, LM3633, LM3695 and LM3697. >>> >>> It controls LEDs on Droid 4 >>> smartphone, including keyboard and screen backlights. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Milo Kim >>> [add LED subsystem support for keyboard backlight and rework DT >>> binding according to Rob Herrings feedback] >>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel >>> [remove backlight subsystem support for now] >>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek >> >> So... this driver adds support for LM3532, LM3631, LM3632, LM3633, >> LM3695 and LM3697 (or it did when I signed it off). > > Yes I have to pull these out of the patch. > >> >> The rest of the series does not really bring any advantages (you claim >> it may add advantages in future). It takes code out of common driver >> and duplicates it. > > > I disagree. Honestly using that ideallogy all LED drivers should use the common code > as it is a wrapper around regmap and a few if statements. > > The 3632 adds the proper LED flash class support coupled with proper backlight support. > The 3633 adds the proper support for LV and HV LED support. > > Duplicate code that I could find is put in the common file. > This patch set adds the LED devices as all other LED devices are added in the LED directory. > >> >> Could we take this patch, get the basic support for LM3532, LM3631, >> LM3632, LM3633, LM3695 and LM3697, and then split out the drivers when >> we actually gain some advantage doing so (and also when the costs are >> clear)? > > We have debated this over and over and now we have 3 different implementations > available we need to collude on which one we want to support. > > Jacek I defer to you and Pavel since you are both LED maintainers. > > I can support the dedicated LED drivers but I cannot support the TI LMU only implementation. I uphold my previous opinion - please go ahead with moving the support for non-MFD devices from MFD subsystem to the LED subsystem. And yes - along with the bindings. This is semantically correct, and yet we don't have mainline users. Pavel - you will have to engage more people for your crusade to prevail. For now, to speed up the things, I am forced to ignore your NAK. So NAK to your NAK. Sorry. -- Best regards, Jacek Anaszewski