On 20/10/16 16:29, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 10/20/2016 04:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> [...]
>> Good idea! Then the "envelope-detector,inverted" bool can go, and be
>> implied by the compatible string. If some way to rebind the irq trigger
>> is later discovered that can be added as a channel attr without
>> deprecating any dt bindings stuff. While at it, the other properties
>> ("envelope-detector,dac-max" and "envelope-detector,comp-interval-ms")
>> could also be implied from the compatible string. Would that be better?
>> I think so.
>>
>> But, the compatible string is one thing and the driver name is another.
>> "axentia,tse850-envelope-detector" doesn't seem like the best of driver
>> names...
>
> The driver name is not that important we can still change that later if we
> have to, the DT compatible string on the other hand is fixed.
>
>>
>> Are there any existing examples of drivers for (generic) things built
>> with discrete components like this that could perhaps provide guidance?
>
> Not that I'm aware of.
>
Me neither. Always interesting to break new ground ;)
J
--
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
