On 2017-01-02 22:13, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>
>
> On 2 January 2017 20:47:58 GMT+00:00, Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 2017-01-02 19:05, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> On 02/01/17 16:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>>> On 2017-01-01 12:00, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>>> On 30/11/16 08:17, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>>>>> Analog Devices ADG792A/G is a triple 4:1 mux.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Few comments inline. Worth adding anything about the gpio (output pins) to
>>>>> the binding at this stage as well? Would certainly be nice to support
>>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> I'll add optional properties "gpio-controller;" and "#gpio-cells = <2>;"
>>>> with the usual interpretation in v7 (but no implementation...) Is that
>>>> enough?
>>>>
>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/misc/mux-adg792a.txt | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
>>>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/mux-adg792a.txt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/mux-adg792a.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/mux-adg792a.txt
>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>> index 000000000000..4677f9ab1c55
>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/mux-adg792a.txt
>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
>>>>>> +Bindings for Analog Devices ADG792A/G Triple 4:1 Multiplexers
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Required properties:
>>>>>> +- compatible : "adi,adg792a" or "adi,adg792g"
>>>>>> +- #mux-control-cells : <0> if parallel, or <1> if not.
>>>>>> +* Standard mux-controller bindings as decribed in mux-controller.txt
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Optional properties:
>>>>>> +- adi,parallel : if present, the three muxes are bound together with a single
>>>>>> + mux controller, controlling all three muxes in parallel.
>>>>>> +- adi,idle-state : if present, array of states the three mux controllers will
>>>>>> + have when idle (or, if parallel, a single idle-state).
>>>>> Hmm. These are actually a policy decision. As only one policy will make
>>>>> sense for a given set of hardware probably fine to have it in here I guess.
>>>>> Might be worth adding a note to say this though.
>>>>
>>>> I don't really know what you want me to add, do you have a suggestion for the
>>>> wording?
>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Mux controller states 0 through 3 correspond to signals A through D in the
>>>>>> +datasheet. Mux controller states 4 and 5 are only available as possible idle
>>>>>> +states. State 4 represents that nothing is connected, and state 5 represents
>>>>>> +that the mux controller keeps the mux in its previously selected state during
>>>>>> +the idle period. State 5 is the default idle state.
>>>>> I'm never a great fan of magic numbers. Can we represent this more cleanly by
>>>>> breaking it into multiple properties?
>>>>> Optional:
>>>>> adi,idle-switch-to-channel : switch to this channel when idle.
>>>>> adi,idle-high-impedance : <boolean> the nothing connected state?
>>>>>
>>>>> If neither present leaves it in previous state?
>>>>
>>>> It's not that easy. adi,idle-state is an array when there are three single
>>>> pole quadruple throw muxes, so there really needs to be a number for each
>>>> desired idle-behavior. Unless you have a better idea for how to describe
>>>> that?
>>> The above with arrays for each of the two parameters?
>>> Though then you need a priority documented - I'd say high impedance overrides
>>> the channel selection if both are present.
>>
>> How would you specify that the first mux should idle in "state 5", the second
>> should idle in "state 4" and the third in "state 0"? (original state numbering)
>>
>> You'd still need a magic number for the default idle state (state 5) so that
>> you can skip entries in the arrays. Or am I missing something?
> Ah I had missed state 5. Hmm would need explicit control for that as well. Not nice...
>
> Perhaps 3 state control (magic number but with channel nums separate)
>
> Idle-state array of <switchtostate, currentstate, highimpedance>
>
> Idle-state array of states to switch to if so set?
>
> Slight nicer than a mess of the two things perhaps?
Perhaps making adi,idle-state an array of tuples <mux-number state> and
add adi,idle-high-impedance as an array of mux-numbers, so that my example
above would come out as:
adi,idle-high-impedance = <1>; /* mux 1 idles with high imp */
adi,idle-state = <2 0>; /* mux 2 idles in state 0 (signal A) */
mux 0 is not mentioned and idles in its previously selected state.
If you want mux 0 to idle with high impedance:
adi,idle-high-impedance = <0 1>;
adi,idle-state = <2 0>;
If you want mux 0 to idle with signal C:
adi,idle-high-impedance = <1>;
adi,idle-state = <0 3>, <2 0>;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Example:
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* three independent mux controllers (of which one is used) */
>>>>>> + &i2c0 {
>>>>>> + mux: adg792a@50 {
>>>>>> + compatible = "adi,adg792a";
>>>>>> + reg = <0x50>;
>>>>>> + #mux-control-cells = <1>;
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + adc-mux {
>>>>>> + compatible = "iio-mux";
>>>>>> + io-channels = <&adc 0>;
>>>>>> + io-channel-names = "parent";
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + mux-controls = <&mux 1>;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + channels = "sync-1", "", "out";
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * Three parallel muxes with one mux controller, useful e.g. if
>>>>>> + * the adc is differential, thus needing two signals to be muxed
>>>>>> + * simultaneously for correct operation.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + &i2c0 {
>>>>>> + pmux: adg792a@50 {
>>>>>> + compatible = "adi,adg792a";
>>>>>> + reg = <0x50>;
>>>>>> + #mux-control-cells = <0>;
>>>>>> + adi,parallel;
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + diff-adc-mux {
>>>>>> + compatible = "iio-mux";
>>>>>> + io-channels = <&adc 0>;
>>>>>> + io-channel-names = "parent";
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + mux-controls = <&pmux>;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + channels = "sync-1", "", "out";
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>
--
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
