[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] ramips: D-Link DIR-810L: make led naming consistent with other boards

[Michael Heimpold]

Signed-off-by: Michael Heimpold <mhei at heimpold.de>
---

I just stumbled over r42619 and wondered, whether we should not keep the
<boardname>:<color>:<function> naming scheme. Or is there a reason
to not follow this convention?

Yours,
Michael

 target/linux/ramips/base-files/etc/board.d/01_leds |    2 +-
 target/linux/ramips/dts/DIR-810L.dts               |    8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/target/linux/ramips/base-files/etc/board.d/01_leds b/target/linux/ramips/base-files/etc/board.d/01_leds
index bf646ed..5c57956 100755
--- a/target/linux/ramips/base-files/etc/board.d/01_leds
+++ b/target/linux/ramips/base-files/etc/board.d/01_leds
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ case $board in
 		set_wifi_led "d-link:green:wifi"
 		;;
 	dir-810l)
-		ucidef_set_led_default "power" "POWER" "dlink:power:green" "1"
+		ucidef_set_led_default "power" "POWER" "d-link:green:power" "1"
 		;;
 	dir-610-a1 |\
 	dir-300-b7 |\
diff --git a/target/linux/ramips/dts/DIR-810L.dts b/target/linux/ramips/dts/DIR-810L.dts
index 5dd8859..dd0d39c 100644
--- a/target/linux/ramips/dts/DIR-810L.dts
+++ b/target/linux/ramips/dts/DIR-810L.dts
@@ -117,15 +117,15 @@
 	gpio-leds {
 		compatible = "gpio-leds";
 		power {
-			label = "dlink:power:green";
+			label = "d-link:green:power";
 			gpios = <&gpio0 9 0>;
 		};
-		internet {
-			label = "dlink:internet:orange";
+		wan {
+			label = "d-link:orange:wan";
 			gpios = <&gpio0 12 0>;
 		};
 		status {
-			label = "dlink:power:orange";
+			label = "d-link:orange:power";
 			gpios = <&gpio0 13 0>;
 		};
 	};
-- 
1.7.10.4
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel