On 26/06/2023 10:15, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 23/06/2023 23.57, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 05:44:50PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 01:33:25PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml >>>> index 590ea7936ad7..1f90ce3c7932 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml >>>> @@ -51,6 +51,14 @@ properties: >>>> Shunt (sense) resistor value in micro-Ohms. >>>> default: 100000000 >>>> >>>> + digital-input-threshold-microvolt: >>> >>> Should this not have an adi vendor prefix, similar to >>> "adi,digital-input-threshold-mode-fixed"? >> >> Yes. > > OK. But I'm not really sure what the rules are for when such a prefix > must be added, so some guidance would be appreciated. There's > > - DO use a vendor prefix on device specific property names. Consider if > properties could be common among devices of the same class. > > And my thinking was that a threshold for when a digital input should > count as high/low would be a rather generic thing, so not particularly > device specific. Then find some more users of it. > > Also, this very binding has a shunt-resistor-micro-ohms, and the > individual channels have a drive-strength-microamp (granted, that latter > one is a recent one of mine and may have slipped through review?). I can > certainly understand that when a property specifies a raw value to put > into some register (or field), that's very specific to that chip (or > small family of chips) - the adi,ch-func properties fall into that category. Best regards, Krzysztof
