On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 05:08:38PM +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 06:55:09PM +0100, Denis Carikli wrote: > > [...] > > > +Optional properties: > > > + - default-state: The initial state of the backlight. > > > + Valid values are "on", "off", and "keep". > > > + The "keep" setting will keep the backlight at whatever its current > > > + state is, without producing a glitch. The default is keep if this > > > + property is not present. > > > > I'm not sure if "on", "off" and "keep" are a good choice for this > > binding. Having strings for these tristate values seems suboptimal. > > Other bindings have chosen a representation that, transposed to this > > use-case, would read something like this: > > > > - default-state: The initial state of the backlight. Valid > > values: > > - 0: off > > - 1: on > > > > If the "default-state" property is not present, the default > > will be to keep the current backlight state. > > > > Which is in fact the exact behaviour that your binding describes, but > > it's much more intuitive in my opinion. > > Why we cannot use GPIO bindings for active level here? > What a reason for "keep" state? Can this be an additional property?
Default state and active level are two different things. Thierry
pgpRNx0JFrT6m.pgp
Description: PGP signature
