On Thu, 15 May 2025, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> thank you for providing all this input. I appreciate this a lot. And
> please excuse the slow response. I am currently at the EmbeddedRecipes
> conference which needed a bit of preparation on my side.
>
> > So the node would look like this, for the pca1 LED:
> >
> > led-1 {
> > function = "pca1";
> > color = <LED_COLOR_GREEN>;
> > default-state = "keep";
> > };
>
> This looks optimal to me, if this is acceptable. I totally understand
> the advantages and desire to unify LED naming. The main problem for me
> here is that the GPIO-driven LEDs have no 'device' part in the generic
> name. And only 'function:color' seems suboptimal for the board here in
> question. I kinda arranged with the option of using "LED_FUNCTION_DEBUG"
> for the above LEDs and some other function for the LED on the carrier
> board. This seems OK enough for a development board, but ideal would be
> the above solution. So, if you can live with the above, I'll happily
> make use of it. If you want me to live with the different
> LED_FUNCTION_* solution, I will survive this as well...
My only fear would be one of setting a precedent for bespoke function
strings. However, seeing as we already have some that slipped through
the gaps [0], I guess one more wouldn't hurt.
FTR however, my preference would be to use LED_FUNCTION_DEBUG as
previously discussed. If you can fight your slightly leaning partiality
for a bespoke string, please choose one of the predefined options. If
you cannot live with it, go ahead with the bespoke option.
[0]
arch/arm/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm6846-genexis-xg6846b.dts
arch/arm/boot/dts/intel/ixp/intel-ixp42x-netgear-wg302v1.dts
arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcmbca/bcm4906-netgear-r8000p.dts
arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcmbca/bcm4906-tplink-archer-c2300-v1.dts
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
