On 3/12/24 16:18, Zev Weiss wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 11:35:31PM PST, Ban Feng wrote:
Hi Zev,
On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 4:19 PM Zev Weiss <zev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 04:56:06PM PST, baneric926@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>From: Ban Feng <kcfeng0@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>NCT7363Y is an I2C based hardware monitoring chip from Nuvoton.
>
>Signed-off-by: Ban Feng <kcfeng0@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>---
<snip>
>+
>+static const struct of_device_id nct7363_of_match[] = {
>+ { .compatible = "nuvoton,nct7363" },
As far as I can see from the code in this driver, it looks like this
driver should also be compatible with the nct7362; shall we add the ID
table entry for it now? (Though I only have a datasheet for the
nct7362, not the nct7363, so I don't know exactly how they differ.)
As far as I know, the difference between these two ICs is 0x2A~0x2C
Fading LED for 7362, and 0x2A Watchdog Timer for 7363.
In my v1 patch, I indeed add the nct7362 to the ID table, however,
this makes it more complicated and our datasheet isn't public yet.
I think maybe supporting more chips will be done in the future, but not now.
If the only differences are in features the driver doesn't utilize, I'm not clear on how it adds any complexity. As far as I'm aware, neither datasheet is public (NCT7363 nor NCT7362), so if we're going to have a public driver for one, why not also do so for the other? It's a single additional line -- and furthermore, having made that change and tested it out, I can report that the driver seems to work just fine on NCT7362 hardware as well.
"if we're going to have a public driver for one, why not also do so for the other"
If you are trying to say that there should be two separate drivers, sorry, that
would be absolutely unacceptable.
Guenter
