Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 01:58:50PM +0100, Romain Perier wrote: > 2014-11-24 12:35 GMT+01:00 Johan Hovold : > > You should also fix the commit message, which claims to define a "helper > > function which is compatible with both properties", something which was > > no longer the case. > > > So I need to resend this patch which would only introduce an helper > function which checks for "system-power-controller" property (it would > also have a new commit message). > As you suggested, this helper might be named > "of_device_is_system_power_controller" ? Correct. Rename the helper and property name you introduced to "of_device_is_system_power_controller" and "system-power-controller" and update the act8865 driver to use the new names (all in one patch). Send the patch to Mark (and keep everyone else one CC) so he can apply it to the regulator tree. Other drivers that are currently using "ti,system-power-controller" can continue to do so (for backward compatibility), while we later also add a call to your helper function (and update binding documentation) and also update the device trees for boards that use this functionality. Thanks, Johan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
Am Montag, 24. November 2014, 14:01:02 schrieb Romain Perier: > 2014-11-24 13:58 GMT+01:00 Romain Perier : > > So I need to resend this patch which would only introduce an helper > > function which checks for "system-power-controller" property (it would > > also have a new commit message). > > As you suggested, this helper might be named > > "of_device_is_system_power_controller" ? > > I mean, the backward compatibility can be handled directly from the > device driver which would use the new property, no ? yep, that is what Grant asked for ... to have drivers that need backward- compatibility (like with the "ti,"-prefix) to do this themselfs. Heiko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
2014-11-24 13:58 GMT+01:00 Romain Perier :
> 2014-11-24 12:35 GMT+01:00 Johan Hovold :
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:24:56AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:34:58PM +, Auto Configured wrote:
>>> > > From: Romain Perier
>>> > >
>>> > > It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
>>> > > capability").
>>> > > As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to
>>> > > the
>>> > > old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being
>>> > > that
>>> > > the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out
>>> > > of control
>>> > > of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
>>> > > system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which
>>> > > power-off
>>> > > the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to
>>> > > suggest to
>>> > > remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
>>> > > "system-power-controller"
>>> > > as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming
>>> > > changes and
>>> > > defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties,
>>> > > the old one
>>> > > which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
>>> >
>>> > Now this is a bit of a mess.
>>> >
>>> > There's a commit in the mfd tree, 25f833c1171d ("mfd: tps65910: Convert
>>> > ti,system-power-controller DT property to poweroff-source"), which
>>> > breaks all dts using tps65910 since these are never updated to the now
>>> > retracted property name ("poweroff-source").
>>>
>>> My word!
>>>
>>> Romain, what conversation on the MLs are you talking about?
>>
>> I think Romain is referring to this thread:
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/23/161
>
> Yes, this is this one.
>
>>
>>> > This one should simply be reverted ASAP.
>>>
>>> No need to revert, I can just remove the patch from the MFD tree.
>>
>> Ok, good. Then this is limited to the regulator tree, and we could
>> proceed as I outlined below.
>>
>>
>> Romain, care to resend this patch without the tps65910 chunks?
>
> If you can just drop the patch from mfd tree Lee, please do.
> Yes Johan, np, what I want is that we find a smart solution, nothing more.
>
>>
>> You should also fix the commit message, which claims to define a "helper
>> function which is compatible with both properties", something which was
>> no longer the case.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Johan
>
> So I need to resend this patch which would only introduce an helper
> function which checks for "system-power-controller" property (it would
> also have a new commit message).
> As you suggested, this helper might be named
> "of_device_is_system_power_controller" ?
I mean, the backward compatibility can be handled directly from the
device driver which would use the new property, no ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
2014-11-24 12:35 GMT+01:00 Johan Hovold :
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:24:56AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:34:58PM +, Auto Configured wrote:
>> > > From: Romain Perier
>> > >
>> > > It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
>> > > capability").
>> > > As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to
>> > > the
>> > > old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being
>> > > that
>> > > the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out of
>> > > control
>> > > of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
>> > > system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which
>> > > power-off
>> > > the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to
>> > > suggest to
>> > > remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
>> > > "system-power-controller"
>> > > as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming changes
>> > > and
>> > > defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties, the
>> > > old one
>> > > which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
>> >
>> > Now this is a bit of a mess.
>> >
>> > There's a commit in the mfd tree, 25f833c1171d ("mfd: tps65910: Convert
>> > ti,system-power-controller DT property to poweroff-source"), which
>> > breaks all dts using tps65910 since these are never updated to the now
>> > retracted property name ("poweroff-source").
>>
>> My word!
>>
>> Romain, what conversation on the MLs are you talking about?
>
> I think Romain is referring to this thread:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/23/161
Yes, this is this one.
>
>> > This one should simply be reverted ASAP.
>>
>> No need to revert, I can just remove the patch from the MFD tree.
>
> Ok, good. Then this is limited to the regulator tree, and we could
> proceed as I outlined below.
>
>
> Romain, care to resend this patch without the tps65910 chunks?
If you can just drop the patch from mfd tree Lee, please do.
Yes Johan, np, what I want is that we find a smart solution, nothing more.
>
> You should also fix the commit message, which claims to define a "helper
> function which is compatible with both properties", something which was
> no longer the case.
>
> Thanks,
> Johan
So I need to resend this patch which would only introduce an helper
function which checks for "system-power-controller" property (it would
also have a new commit message).
As you suggested, this helper might be named
"of_device_is_system_power_controller" ?
Everything is okay ?
Romain
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:24:56AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:34:58PM +, Auto Configured wrote:
> > > From: Romain Perier
> > >
> > > It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
> > > capability").
> > > As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to
> > > the
> > > old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being
> > > that
> > > the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out of
> > > control
> > > of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
> > > system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which
> > > power-off
> > > the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to suggest
> > > to
> > > remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
> > > "system-power-controller"
> > > as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming changes
> > > and
> > > defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties, the
> > > old one
> > > which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
> >
> > Now this is a bit of a mess.
> >
> > There's a commit in the mfd tree, 25f833c1171d ("mfd: tps65910: Convert
> > ti,system-power-controller DT property to poweroff-source"), which
> > breaks all dts using tps65910 since these are never updated to the now
> > retracted property name ("poweroff-source").
>
> My word!
>
> Romain, what conversation on the MLs are you talking about?
I think Romain is referring to this thread:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/23/161
> > This one should simply be reverted ASAP.
>
> No need to revert, I can just remove the patch from the MFD tree.
Ok, good. Then this is limited to the regulator tree, and we could
proceed as I outlined below.
> > > Signed-off-by: Romain Perier
> > > ---
> > > .../bindings/power/{poweroff.txt => power-controller.txt}| 0
> > > .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt | 4 ++--
> > > drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9
> > > -
> > > drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c| 2 +-
> > > include/linux/of.h | 6
> > > +++---
> > > 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > Romain, what tree is this patch against? The changes to the tps65910
> > driver appears not to even be in the regulator tree, yet you asked Mark
> > to merge this. And the MFD maintainer is not even on CC.
> >
> > Let's fix the breakage by reverting the offending commit in mfd. Then the
> > new standard name can be introduced in regulator alone (e.g. this patch
> > without the tps65910 bits) as nothing outside of regulator should be
> > using the new power-off feature (or binding) for act8865. Then other
> > drivers and dts can be converted to use the new property name (while
> > retaining backwards compatibility) for 3.20.
> >
> > [ We should probably also consider adding an "of_device_is_" prefix to
> > the helper name for consistency. ]
Romain, care to resend this patch without the tps65910 chunks?
You should also fix the commit message, which claims to define a "helper
function which is compatible with both properties", something which was
no longer the case.
Thanks,
Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:34:58PM +, Auto Configured wrote:
> > From: Romain Perier
> >
> > It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
> > capability").
> > As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to the
> > old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being that
> > the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out of
> > control
> > of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
> > system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which
> > power-off
> > the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to suggest to
> > remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
> > "system-power-controller"
> > as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming changes and
> > defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties, the
> > old one
> > which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
>
> Now this is a bit of a mess.
>
> There's a commit in the mfd tree, 25f833c1171d ("mfd: tps65910: Convert
> ti,system-power-controller DT property to poweroff-source"), which
> breaks all dts using tps65910 since these are never updated to the now
> retracted property name ("poweroff-source").
My word!
Romain, what conversation on the MLs are you talking about?
> This one should simply be reverted ASAP.
No need to revert, I can just remove the patch from the MFD tree.
> > Signed-off-by: Romain Perier
> > ---
> > .../bindings/power/{poweroff.txt => power-controller.txt}| 0
> > .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt | 4 ++--
> > drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9
> > -
> > drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c| 2 +-
> > include/linux/of.h | 6 +++---
> > 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> Romain, what tree is this patch against? The changes to the tps65910
> driver appears not to even be in the regulator tree, yet you asked Mark
> to merge this. And the MFD maintainer is not even on CC.
>
> Let's fix the breakage by reverting the offending commit in mfd. Then the
> new standard name can be introduced in regulator alone (e.g. this patch
> without the tps65910 bits) as nothing outside of regulator should be
> using the new power-off feature (or binding) for act8865. Then other
> drivers and dts can be converted to use the new property name (while
> retaining backwards compatibility) for 3.20.
>
> [ We should probably also consider adding an "of_device_is_" prefix to
> the helper name for consistency. ]
>
> Johan
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
2014-11-21 14:18 GMT+01:00 Romain Perier : > it was merged by Lee Jones (so it was merged onto > the mfd tree) It was done, for a previous serie, not this one . This is when I proposed to update the dts too (for all boards using the custom property) until the discussion turned into a troll. Romain -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
2014-11-21 11:59 GMT+01:00 Johan Hovold :
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:34:58PM +, Auto Configured wrote:
>> From: Romain Perier
>>
>> It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
>> capability").
>> As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to the
>> old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being that
>> the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out of
>> control
>> of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
>> system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which
>> power-off
>> the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to suggest to
>> remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
>> "system-power-controller"
>> as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming changes and
>> defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties, the old
>> one
>> which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
>
> Now this is a bit of a mess.
>
> There's a commit in the mfd tree, 25f833c1171d ("mfd: tps65910: Convert
> ti,system-power-controller DT property to poweroff-source"), which
> breaks all dts using tps65910 since these are never updated to the now
> retracted property name ("poweroff-source").
No seriously ? yes, this is why I ask for feedbacks since 3 weeks... ^^
>
> This one should simply be reverted ASAP.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Romain Perier
>> ---
>> .../bindings/power/{poweroff.txt => power-controller.txt}| 0
>> .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt | 4 ++--
>> drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9
>> -
>> drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c| 2 +-
>> include/linux/of.h | 6 +++---
>> 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> Romain, what tree is this patch against? The changes to the tps65910
> driver appears not to even be in the regulator tree, yet you asked Mark
> to merge this. And the MFD maintainer is not even on CC.
I work with linux-next, this patch is present in that tree. If I
remember correctly, it was merged by Lee Jones (so it was merged onto
the mfd tree)
>
> Let's fix the breakage by reverting the offending commit in mfd. Then the
> new standard name can be introduced in regulator alone (e.g. this patch
> without the tps65910 bits) as nothing outside of regulator should be
> using the new power-off feature (or binding) for act8865. Then other
> drivers and dts can be converted to use the new property name (while
> retaining backwards compatibility) for 3.20.
>
> [ We should probably also consider adding an "of_device_is_" prefix to
> the helper name for consistency. ]
>
> Johan
Maintainers, Mark, Grant, Lee, what do you think ?
Thanks,
Romain
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:34:58PM +, Auto Configured wrote:
> From: Romain Perier
>
> It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
> capability").
> As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to the
> old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being that
> the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out of
> control
> of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
> system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which power-off
> the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to suggest to
> remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
> "system-power-controller"
> as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming changes and
> defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties, the old
> one
> which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
Now this is a bit of a mess.
There's a commit in the mfd tree, 25f833c1171d ("mfd: tps65910: Convert
ti,system-power-controller DT property to poweroff-source"), which
breaks all dts using tps65910 since these are never updated to the now
retracted property name ("poweroff-source").
This one should simply be reverted ASAP.
> Signed-off-by: Romain Perier
> ---
> .../bindings/power/{poweroff.txt => power-controller.txt}| 0
> .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt | 4 ++--
> drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9
> -
> drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c| 2 +-
> include/linux/of.h | 6 +++---
> 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Romain, what tree is this patch against? The changes to the tps65910
driver appears not to even be in the regulator tree, yet you asked Mark
to merge this. And the MFD maintainer is not even on CC.
Let's fix the breakage by reverting the offending commit in mfd. Then the
new standard name can be introduced in regulator alone (e.g. this patch
without the tps65910 bits) as nothing outside of regulator should be
using the new power-off feature (or binding) for act8865. Then other
drivers and dts can be converted to use the new property name (while
retaining backwards compatibility) for 3.20.
[ We should probably also consider adding an "of_device_is_" prefix to
the helper name for consistency. ]
Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
ping 2014-11-17 11:51 GMT+01:00 Romain Perier : > @Most of the people who were ranting about this serie: could you send > feedbacks please ? > > 2014-11-14 8:22 GMT+01:00 Romain Perier : >> Hi, >> >> Who should merge this serie ? as Mark merged the previous one it would >> probably make sense to do the same here (at least, in my opinion) >> >> Thanks for your feedbacks. >> >> Have a nice day, >> Romain >> >> 2014-11-13 21:55 GMT+01:00 Grant Likely : >> igned-off-by: Romain Perier >>> >>> Acked-by: Grant Likely >>> >>> Please merge via whichever tree needs this change. >>> >>> g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
@Most of the people who were ranting about this serie: could you send feedbacks please ? 2014-11-14 8:22 GMT+01:00 Romain Perier : > Hi, > > Who should merge this serie ? as Mark merged the previous one it would > probably make sense to do the same here (at least, in my opinion) > > Thanks for your feedbacks. > > Have a nice day, > Romain > > 2014-11-13 21:55 GMT+01:00 Grant Likely : > igned-off-by: Romain Perier >> >> Acked-by: Grant Likely >> >> Please merge via whichever tree needs this change. >> >> g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
Hi, Who should merge this serie ? as Mark merged the previous one it would probably make sense to do the same here (at least, in my opinion) Thanks for your feedbacks. Have a nice day, Romain 2014-11-13 21:55 GMT+01:00 Grant Likely : igned-off-by: Romain Perier > > Acked-by: Grant Likely > > Please merge via whichever tree needs this change. > > g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: Rename "poweroff-source" property to "system-power-controller"
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 13:34:58 +
, Auto Configured
wrote:
> From: Romain Perier
>
> It reverts commit a4b4e0461ec5 ("of: Add standard property for poweroff
> capability").
> As discussed on the mailing list, it makes more sense to rename back to the
> old established property name, without the vendor prefix. Problem being that
> the word "source" usually tends to be used for inputs and that is out of
> control
> of the OS. The poweroff capability is an output which simply turns the
> system-power off. Also, this property might be used by drivers which power-off
> the system and power back on subsequent RTC alarms. This seems to suggest to
> remove "poweroff" from the property name and to choose
> "system-power-controller"
> as the more generic name. This patchs adds the required renaming changes and
> defines an helper function which is compatible with both properties, the old
> one
> which was only used by tps65910 and the new one without vendor-prefix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Romain Perier
Acked-by: Grant Likely
Please merge via whichever tree needs this change.
g.
> ---
> .../bindings/power/{poweroff.txt => power-controller.txt}| 0
> .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt | 4 ++--
> drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 9
> -
> drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c| 2 +-
> include/linux/of.h | 6 +++---
> 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/{poweroff.txt =>
> power-controller.txt} (100%)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/poweroff.txt
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power-controller.txt
> similarity index 100%
> rename from Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/poweroff.txt
> rename to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power-controller.txt
> diff --git
> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt
> index 01a5b07..dad6358 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/act8865-regulator.txt
> @@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ Required properties:
> - reg: I2C slave address
>
> Optional properties:
> -- poweroff-source: Telling whether or not this pmic is controlling
> - the system power. See Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/poweroff.txt
> .
> +- system-power-controller: Telling whether or not this pmic is controlling
> + the system power. See
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power-controller.txt .
>
> Any standard regulator properties can be used to configure the single
> regulator.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> index b8dca8a..3a796a5 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
> @@ -386,6 +386,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id tps65910_of_match[] = {
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tps65910_of_match);
>
> +static inline bool tps65910_is_pm_off_found(struct device_node *np)
> +{
> + if (of_property_read_bool(np, "ti,system-power-controller"))
> + return true;
> + return of_is_system_power_controller(np);
> +}
> +
> static struct tps65910_board *tps65910_parse_dt(struct i2c_client *client,
> unsigned long *chip_id)
> {
> @@ -423,7 +430,7 @@ static struct tps65910_board *tps65910_parse_dt(struct
> i2c_client *client,
>
> board_info->irq = client->irq;
> board_info->irq_base = -1;
> - board_info->pm_off = of_system_has_poweroff_source(np);
> + board_info->pm_off = tps65910_is_pm_off_found(np);
>
> return board_info;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
> b/drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
> index 76301ed..435aba1 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
> @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static int act8865_pmic_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> return ret;
> }
>
> - if (of_system_has_poweroff_source(dev->of_node)) {
> + if (of_is_system_power_controller(dev->of_node)) {
> if (!pm_power_off) {
> act8865_i2c_client = client;
> act8865->off_reg = off_reg;
> diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h
> index d933717..f9541bc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/of.h
> +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> @@ -965,14 +965,14 @@ static inline int of_changeset_update_property(struct
> of_changeset *ocs,
> extern int of_resolve_phandles(struct device_node *tree);
>
> /**
> - * of_system_has_poweroff_source - Tells if poweroff-source is found for
> device_node
> + * of_is_system_power_controller - Tells if system-power-controller is found
> for device_node
> * @np: Pointer to the given device_node
> *
> * return true if present fal
