On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 20:43:55 +0100 Jorge Marques <gastmaier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > + compatible: > > > + enum: > > > + - adi,ad4050 > > > + - adi,ad4052 > > > + - adi,ad4056 > > > + - adi,ad4058 > > > > Can you mention in your commit message what differs between these > > devices that makes picking one as the "base"/fallback compatible > > unsuitable please? > Sure, to be added: > > Each variant of the family differs in speed and resolution, resulting > in different scan types and spi word sizes, that are matched by the > compatible with the chip_info. > The device contains two required interrupts (gp0, gp1) and one optional > gpio (cnv). Explain why the interrupts are required. That is unusual. Note the driver can be stricter than the binding, so it may make sense to require them in the driver, but leave it flexible in the binding. If someone has a board without them wired, then they can look at adding polling or timing logic to avoid the need for the interrupt lines or at reducing functionality of the driver. > > > > + > > > + vdd-supply: true > > > + vdd_1_8-supply: true > > > > You're allowed to use . in property names, and the _s should be -s. > > That said, vdd and vdd 1.8? Shouldn't both have the voltage in them in > > that case? > I overlooked the supplies, the correct are vdd, vio as mandatory, > and vref is optional. > > Jorge
