Hi,
On Thursday, November 05, 2015 07:13:41 PM Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 04/11/15 18:53, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> > To continue from this "label" property idea I was wondering if we
> > would add it as new optional(?) file node for IIO devices.>
> > One could then specify it like:
> >
> > tscadc: tscadc@44e0d000 {
> > compatible = "ti,am3359-tscadc";
> > ...
> > am335x_adc: adc {
> > compatible = "ti,am3359-adc";
> > ...
> > label = "Port A";
> > };
> > };
> >
> > And this would generate file /sys/bus/iio/iio:deviceX/label with
> > contents of "Port A".
> >
> > Then during the application startup it would just need to scan all
> > devices under /sys/bus/iio and determine what labelled device it
> > wants to use.
> >
> > It would be up to device's developer to determine what labels to use
> > in their designs. This would not break ABI and would be just an
> > extension for it.
> >
> > One could also auto-assign label "am335x_adc" in this case too. But
> > if you include existing arch device tree then changing label in top
> > level is kinda a bit annoying as you would then need to duplicate all
> > properties with another label and disable arch device tree's
> > settings. Could cause also conflict if there are references elsewhere
> > to existing arch nodes.
> >
> > Having following in device's device tree file would allow one to
> > override label or just only specify that.
> >
> > #include "am33xx.dtsi"
> >
> > &tscadc {
> > status = "okay";
> >
> > adc {
> > ti,adc-channels = <4 5 6 7>;
> >
> > label = "Port A";
> > };
> > };
> >
> > I think this "label" model would be simple to understand.
> >
> > Whether this needs to be implemented as per device driver feature or
> > could be implemented as generic IIO functionality I do not know.
> The principal looks good to me. It's not however only an IIO issue
> so perhaps we should expand the discussion to include other subsystems
> likely to have similar issues (though perhaps to a lesser degree) such as
> hwmon and input? Any others?
>
> We could also autobuild the label from other sources such as ACPI
> to uniquely describe the instance of the device (afterall all we really
> care about is that it always has the same name on the same hardware,
> being able to assign meaningful simple names would just be the icing
> on the cake!)
There is a similar discussion for the new character device GPIO interface.[1]
Simple labels have the problem that they could be the same for two devicetree
overlays or chips that are connected via SPI.
Best Regards,
Markus
[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.gpio/11475
>
> Jonathan
> > Thanks,
> > Vesa Jääskeläinen
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
