Hi, On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:43:17AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > No no, "capacity-uah" is what we should use, but you need an ack from > the battery and device tree people that this is OK. Let's not add > "ti,capacity-uah” as that can obviously be a generic property.
I'm okay with capacity-uah. > > [...] > > Oh if they are battery spicific, then ideally we'd have generic batery > voltage to capacity maps property rather than a custom ti specific > property. > > To avoid extra hassles later on, maybe you could submit a generic > binding patch only documenting it to the battery people and the device > tree people? That will make it easier to maintain this driver in the > long run. Actually the proper way would be to differentiate between the battery and the measurement chip / adc and that should be implemented in the long run. The kernel's power supply framework is not yet ready for it, though. Example DT: battery { battery-specific-data; }; fuel-gauge { measures = <&battery>; }; charger { charges = <&battery>; }; Since infrastructure for generic bindings is missing, I think its best to have the vendor properties for now and map this to generic properties, once they have been specified. -- Sebastian
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature