Hi all, Am Freitag, 16. September 2011, 10:35:46 schrieb Jonathan Cameron: > On 09/16/11 05:52, Jonathan Kunkee wrote: > > Hi Jonathan, > > > >> I'm just wondering if some corners of our documentation are useful or > >> not. > >> > >> So straw poll. Has anyone ever read the stuff in > >> > >> device.txt? > >> trigger.txt? > >> ring.txt? > > > > Yes. When I was first looking at changing my HMC6343 driver over to the > > IIO subsystem I read everything in drivers/staging/iio/Documentation. It > > wasn't all that helpful--partly because I'm new to kernel development, > > and partly because it wasn't specific enough. (This was a few months > > ago.) I take these docs as a reference to see "how it was thought to be", when drivers implementations disagree on some point. But sure a reference driver would be even better. > Hehe, I think that counts as a negative on current docs but a positive that > we should have something that actually does the job better! > > >> I'm tempted to drop all 3 of these as pointless maintenance > >> overhead... > > > > I can certainly understand this! > > > >> A well commented dummy driver would be better for explaining these > >> things. > > > > Agreed, especially with these three docs. The information presented is > > fairly fundamental to writing a good IIO driver, but would be much more > > useful inline with the reference implementation of each part. > > Guess we need a 'stub' driver or perhaps two of them, one a basic sysfs > only version (so really short) and the other with all the bells and > whistles. > > Manuel, you proposed something that would be a bit like the all bells and > whistles a while ago. Is there any code to see yet? Seems a shame to > duplicate effort if you have had a chance to work on this! Actually Michael and I agreed that he will start with such an implementation. If there's nothing to go with yet, I can do that too, of course. > > > I also agree with Michael that the documentation should be a good > > jumping-off point. In particular, I was looking to answer two questions: > > 1) Why would I use this subsystem? (general feature descriptions, > > > > example applications, comparison to other subsystems) > > Ah, would you be willing to look at the intro email I wrote to the proposal > to start moving out of staging? It is meant to be covering exactly those > sort of issues, but I may well have missed stuff given I'm reasonably > familiar with all the relevant subsystems! It was in the thread > [RFC PATCH 0/4] IIO: Out of staging step 1. The core. > or I can repost if that helps. > > Would love to get some feedback on that from everyone. > > > 2) How is this subsystem organized/used? (constants, masking, > > relationship > > > > with other subsystems like i2c) > > The relationship with bus subsystems is something that wouldn't have > occurred to me for starters! Thanks. > > > Part of the difficulty I had was in attempting to grok a staging feature > > as if it were mature and static (ring.txt in particular confused me), so > > this is, of course, just my 2c. > > > > Thanks for all the work you're putting in to IIO! I hope this helps. > > I certainly does. Thanks for taking the time! > > Jonathan -- Regards, Manuel Stahl -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
