On 02/07/2016 at 21:46:43 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote : > Hi, > > On 02-07-16 15:35, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > On 02/07/2016 at 17:12:55 +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote : > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 5:00 AM, Alexandre Belloni > > > <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Document the bindings for the Allwinner LRADC. > > > > > > We already have Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/sun4i-lradc-keys.txt > > > and I'm pretty sure Hans (CC-ed) argued that this is not a generic ADC > > > block. > > > > > > Any plans to reconcile the different bindings? > > > > > > > Yes, I already submitted an adc-keys driver that can work with any ADC: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/1/670 > > > > I agree that because it is not yet handling interrupts and is polling > > the ADC, it is not as good as sun4i-lradc-keys yet. My plan is to solve > > that but it require significant work in iio. > > And it also seems to break dt compatibility. Note I'm not against > making an exception for this and breaking the dt compat, but until > the polling is fixed we should not replace sun4i-lradc-keys. > > If I understand you correctly then you want to use a new generic > "sun4i-lradc" compatible. If you do that then we can just build both > drivers for now and use the right compatible depending on how the > board uses the lradc for now. > Well, I never said we have to remove the previous compatible, just that it was probably not the best one. I also didn't send a patch to remove the previous driver and they can indeed coexist nicely for now. Anyway, if we want to remove the sun4i-lradc-keys driver and keep DT compatibility, we'll have to write a small stub driver. It isn't the easiest task but it is doable. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -- 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
