lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dt-bindings: iio: adc: ti,adc081c: Document the binding
On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 13:51:19 +0100
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 25/11/2022 23:09, Samuel Holland wrote:
> > Linux has a driver for these ADCs at drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c, but
> > the compatible strings were undocumented. Add a binding for them. The
> > hardware has an alert interrupt output, but existing ti,adc081c users
> > do not provide the 'interrupts' property, so leave it as optional.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
> > ---
> >
> > .../bindings/iio/adc/ti,adc081c.yaml | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/ti,adc081c.yaml
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/ti,adc081c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/ti,adc081c.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..caaad777580c
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/ti,adc081c.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/adc/ti,adc081c.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: TI Single-channel I2C ADCs
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > + - Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
> > + - Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
> > +
> > +description: |
> > + Single-channel ADC supporting 8, 10, or 12-bit samples and high/low alerts.
> > +
> > +properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + enum:
> > + - ti,adc081c
> > + - ti,adc101c
> > + - ti,adc121c
> > +
> > + reg:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > + interrupts:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > + vref-supply:
> > + description:
> > + Regulator for the combined power supply and voltage reference
> > +
> > + "#io-channel-cells":
> > + const: 1
> > +
> > +required:
> > + - compatible
> > + - reg
>
> Why not requiring io-channel-cells? If it is an IIO ADC provider, you
> need the cells, right?

Only if anyone is using it as a provider. If it's purely being used via
IIO then there are no consumers registered.

So historically I've left it up to those defining the binding to decide if
they think #io-channel-cells should be required or optional.

It gets a bit non obvious with some of the more complex special ADCs on whether
they will ever be consumed. This one is generic, so quite likely it will be.

Jonathan

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-27 18:30    [W:2.058 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site