Hi Ludovic, Josh, On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 05:46:03PM +0200, Desroches, Ludovic wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 05:53:00PM +0800, Josh Wu wrote: > > On 8/22/2013 5:51 PM, Josh Wu wrote: > > >Hi, Maxime > > > > > >On 8/16/2013 3:20 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > >>Hi Josh, > > >> > > >>On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 07:04:29PM +0800, Josh Wu wrote: > > >>>For at91 boards, there are different IPs for adc. Different IPs has > > >>>different STARTUP & PRESCAL mask in ADC_MR. > > >>> > > >>>This patch introduce the multiple compatible string for those > > >>>different IPs. > > >>> > > >>>Signed-off-by: Josh Wu <josh.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > > >>Overall it looks like the right ways, but I think we can take it a step > > >>further. > > >> > > >>I'd drop at least the atmel,adc-drdy-mask, atmel,adc-num-channels, > > >>atmel,adc-status-register, atmel,adc-trigger-register properties (and > > >>probably the triggers as well description as well). > > > > > >yeah, right. Currently I want to drop following: > > > > > >atmel,adc-drdy-mask, atmel,adc-status-register, > > >atmel,adc-trigger-register, atmel,adc-channel-base > > > > > >For the adc-num-channels, I'd like to leave it in dt parameters. > > >It is a description for an adc capablity. > > About this parameter, I'll remove it too from the dt bindings. To set it you > need to have a look to the datasheet and to copy a constant value into the > dt. From my point of view, it means than this parameter should be managed by > the driver and by the dt. > > On the other side since there are some dynamic allocation depending on this > parameter maybe it makes sense to keep it in the dt. If the user wants to use > only 2 channels why doing allocation for max channel number. By the way, this > case is only valid if he uses the two first channels. I don't recall it very well, is there any reason to not have it in the DT? Can the ADC channels be used for something else? Or is it just some IP-specific number of channels? > > > > > >For the triggers, I am not decided. An obvious benifit to remove > > >trigger in dt will save many lines of code. > > > > > >> > > >>Maxime > > >> > > > > > >Best Regards, > > >Josh Wu > > > > Since we are talking about reworking this binding I was thinking about > resolution stuff. Filling atmel,adc-res is also copying constant value from > the device datasheet, so if I was consistent I would say it has to be removed > too. But I am not consistent! I mean by doing this the only thing the user > will have to fill is the resolution value. He can't set the value he wants, > there are only two choices. By keeping it into the dt then he will immediately > see the choices he has. But the resolution should probably be somehow user-defined, probably not really related to the DT has well. I think some other IIO ADC drivers are using sysfs files for this purpose, maybe that would be a better fit? Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
