On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 18:19:53 +0800
Phil Reid <preid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 30/08/2019 20:34, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:01 PM Phil Reid <preid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 30/08/2019 07:02, Rob Herring wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 08:09:19AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>> On 27. 08. 19 5:35, Phil Reid wrote:
> >>>>> This optional property defines a symbolic name for the device.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Phil Reid <preid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/iio-bindings.txt | 5 +++++
> >>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/iio-bindings.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/iio-bindings.txt
> >>>>> index 68d6f8ce063b..ffeae5aad8b5 100644
> >>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/iio-bindings.txt
> >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/iio-bindings.txt
> >>>>> @@ -18,12 +18,17 @@ Required properties:
> >>>>> with a single IIO output and 1 for nodes with multiple
> >>>>> IIO outputs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +Optional properties:
> >>>>> +label: A symbolic name for the device.
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> Example for a simple configuration with no trigger:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> adc: voltage-sensor@35 {
> >>>>> compatible = "maxim,max1139";
> >>>>> reg = <0x35>;
> >>>>> #io-channel-cells = <1>;
> >>>>> + label = "adc_voltage_sensor";
> >>>>> };
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Example for a configuration with trigger:
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Just for the record. This patch has been created based on initial
> >>>> discussion about label property. And Rob had not problem with using
> >>>> label in connection to ina226. https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/27/1213
> >>>
> >>> I didn't, but based on the name here I'm less convinced. 'label' is
> >>> supposed to be for needing to distinguish between more than 1 of
> >>> something. A name like 'adc_voltage_sensor' doesn't really.
> >>>
> >>> Rob
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> That's the problem we're try to solve. Having multiple devices and try to
> >> determine which device is which.
> >> eg: Mutliple adc's.
> >> For example I have the same dac chip on multiple boards that do different
> >> things, it's difficult to id them.
> >>
> >> so label examples could be:
> >> label = "current_control_group1";
> >> label = "voltage_control_group1";
> >>
> >> Are you totally against this or is it a problem with me not being clear
> >> with the problem and the wording of the commit message or the example?
> >
> > It's just the example is less than ideal. But it's just an example, so:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Feel free to update the example if you respin.
> >
> Thanks Rob,
>
> I'll update the example if the series gets a respin.
Please do respin some more 'example' suited names :)
Thanks,
Jonathan
>
>
>
