On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 08:59:39AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 23:14:15 +0100
> Tomasz Duszynski <tduszyns@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Add device tree support for Sensirion SPS30 particulate
> > matter sensor.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Duszynski <tduszyns@xxxxxxxxx>
> one comment inine, around the fact we are trying to move
> to generic names in DT where ever possible. Now we don't
> have a suitable one (IIRC) yet so time to make one up ;)
>
> +CC Rob for his input on that.
> > ---
> > .../bindings/iio/chemical/sensirion,sps30.txt | 12 ++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/chemical/sensirion,sps30.txt
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/chemical/sensirion,sps30.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/chemical/sensirion,sps30.txt
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..6eee2709b5b6
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/chemical/sensirion,sps30.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> > +* Sensirion SPS30 particulate matter sensor
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible: must be "sensirion,sps30"
> > +- reg: the I2C address of the sensor
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > +sps30@69 {
> We should define a generic type. Rob, what would work for this
> one?
>
> particlesensor@69?
>
Wouldn't air-pollution-sensor be somewhat more generic? At least
wikipedia has some article about that. Various other names like
particle-sensor, pm-sensor, particulate-matter-sensor,
air-quality-sensor, tend to return more or less similar number
of search hits. Which means there's no universal naming convention.
> > + compatible = "sensirion,sps30";
> > + reg = <0x69>;
> > +};
>
