No subject

renaming the leds. but I'm sure you have a better general view than I.
I'm fine to skip this patch of the series and fix the DSL led of the
affected boards after renaming the leds.

I totally agree with you, that the led naming is suboptimal. I'm
currently working on adding support for systems which are using three
leds for boot state indication. I had to rewrite the whole diag.sh,
with the benefit that we can get rid of the static power[0-2] naming
as well. With having led names like power[0-2] without any indication
which colour the led has, it's a mess to ensure that I don't break
existing power led setups.

Am I right that you are talking about a naming scheme like
"devicename:colour:function" as it's suggested by
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/leds/leds-class.txt?

Are there any known limitations for the led node names, which are
available at /sys/class/leds/*/device/of_node/? Maybe we can use node
names according to the intended (OpenWrt) use and prevent bloating the
board.d led file this way after switching to the
devicename:colour:function naming.

Are you working on renaming the leds or are you wait for patches?
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel