[PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: iio: proximity: Add Lidar-lite-v2 and v3

Rodrigo Gobbi posted 2 patches 3 months, 1 week ago
[PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: iio: proximity: Add Lidar-lite-v2 and v3
Posted by Rodrigo Gobbi 3 months, 1 week ago
Since v2 is not a trivial device, add it to a dedicated place. The v3 is
similar to the v2 version, so add it as a fallback to the v2. Both versions
are already supported by the driver.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Gobbi <rodrigo.gobbi.7@gmail.com>
---
 .../proximity/pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2.yaml  | 54 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/proximity/pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/proximity/pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/proximity/pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..21c9239c64dc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/proximity/pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/proximity/pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Pulsedlight LIDAR-Lite v2 range-finding sensor
+
+maintainers:
+  - Matt Ranostay <mranostay@gmail.com>
+
+description: |
+  Support for LIDAR_Lite v2 and v3 laser rangefinders. These devices
+  can use a simple I2C communication bus or can operate in a PWM mode using a
+  mode control pin to trigger acquisitions and return the measured distance.
+  It also have a power enable pin, which can be used to shut off the device.
+
+properties:
+  compatible:
+    oneOf:
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - grmn,lidar-lite-v3
+          - const: pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2
+      - const: pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2
+
+  reg:
+    maxItems: 1
+
+  powerdown-gpios:
+    description: GPIO that can be driven low to shut off power to the device.
+    maxItems: 1
+
+  vdd-supply: true
+
+required:
+  - compatible
+  - reg
+  - vdd-supply
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+  - |
+    i2c {
+        #address-cells = <1>;
+        #size-cells = <0>;
+        lidar@62 {
+            compatible = "grmn,lidar-lite-v3", "pulsedlight,lidar-lite-v2";
+            reg = <0x62>;
+            vdd-supply = <&vdd_5v0>;
+        };
+    };
+...
-- 
2.48.1
Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: iio: proximity: Add Lidar-lite-v2 and v3
Posted by Krzysztof Kozlowski 3 months, 1 week ago
On 02/11/2025 23:10, Rodrigo Gobbi wrote:
> Since v2 is not a trivial device, add it to a dedicated place. The v3 is

What is v2 and v3? This patchset is v3, don't refer to it in the commit
msg. If you speak about devices then make it obvious. How anyone going
through `git log` can figure out what is v2. Your patch mentions some v2
and v3 but these are different companies, so somehow completely
different products?


> similar to the v2 version, so add it as a fallback to the v2. Both versions
> are already supported by the driver.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: iio: proximity: Add Lidar-lite-v2 and v3
Posted by Rodrigo Gobbi 3 months ago
On 11/3/25 05:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 02/11/2025 23:10, Rodrigo Gobbi wrote:
>> Since v2 is not a trivial device, add it to a dedicated place. The v3 is
> 
> What is v2 and v3? This patchset is v3, don't refer to it in the commit
> msg. If you speak about devices then make it obvious. How anyone going
> through `git log` can figure out what is v2. Your patch mentions some v2
> and v3 but these are different companies, so somehow completely
> different products?

Sorry for the commit msg, I`ll make it more clear in this case. About different companies, yes,
that is true. It turns out that this is a "special" case because lidar-lite-v2
chipset was manufactured by Pulsedlight vendor. In other hand, the new version from
it, v3, was manufactured by Garmin, which acquired the Pulsedlight.

In previous versions of this patch I`ve reviewed both datasheets, and the pin-out 
is almost the same, that`s why I`ve added in the same binding.

Probably I`ll send a new patch version without using a patchset as pointed here and fixing the
subject/commit msg to make it more clear.

Feel free to suggest anything else or other concerns.
Tks and regards!!!