On 10/20/2016 04:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
[...]
> Good idea! Then the "envelope-detector,inverted" bool can go, and be
> implied by the compatible string. If some way to rebind the irq trigger
> is later discovered that can be added as a channel attr without
> deprecating any dt bindings stuff. While at it, the other properties
> ("envelope-detector,dac-max" and "envelope-detector,comp-interval-ms")
> could also be implied from the compatible string. Would that be better?
> I think so.
>
> But, the compatible string is one thing and the driver name is another.
> "axentia,tse850-envelope-detector" doesn't seem like the best of driver
> names...
The driver name is not that important we can still change that later if we
have to, the DT compatible string on the other hand is fixed.
>
> Are there any existing examples of drivers for (generic) things built
> with discrete components like this that could perhaps provide guidance?
Not that I'm aware of.
--
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
