> > > > > > > > > > > > > And if there's another consumer in the chain, then a node could > > > > > > certainly be both an io-channels consumer and producer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This should also be possible with this architecture. A node can be both > > > > > a backend > > > > > (provider) and a consumer and we have an out of tree design that fits > > > > > this (that > > > > > I > > > > > surely want to upstream after the foundations are done). > > > > > > > > > > > The architecture of the drivers seems odd to me. It looks similar to > > > > > > making a phy driver handle all the state and protocol with the host > > > > > > controller being a backend. > > > > > > > > > > In this case, it's not really a controller. It's more like an extension > > > > > of the > > > > > device > > > > > because we need a way to handle the high sample rates this ADCs can do. > > > > > Then we > > > > > can > > > > > also do test tones with the backend which is useful for interface tuning > > > > > (as > > > > > mentioned above). > > > > > > > > > > To give you a bit more context, I'm adding the generic property because > > > > > we will > > > > > have > > > > > more users for it (from ADI - the next should be the axi-dac core) but > > > > > STM is > > > > > also > > > > > interested in this (likely the next user). > > > > > > > > > > Hope this makes it a bit more clear... > > > > > > > > Yes, thanks. > > > > > > > > I generally ask for 2 users on new common bindings. I've accepted too > > > > many only to have the 2nd user come in a month later and need additions. > > > > An ack on the binding from the STM folks would be nice here. And > > > > Jonathan too. > > > > > > > > > > Olivier, could we get an ack on the bindings patch? Do you also have any > > > idea about > > > how long it would take for you to send patches so we have another user of > > > the schema? > > > > > > On my side, it might very well take a month or so (given we have holidays > > > nearby) as > > > the axi-dac core is more complex than the axi-adc. Bah it might take less > > > than a > > > month to have the first version of it posted in the lists but I can't make > > > any > > > promises. > > > > For the driver side of things I'd like at least 2, preferably 3 users before > > merging. > > We have more flexibility to rework things as any issues will probably be > > internal > > interfaces, but I'd rather wait if we are going to have 3 users within another > > month > > or 2. > > > > Totally fine by me. But how would this look like? Could we have an immutable > branch where we can send patches about this? Or maybe staging? I'm asking > because adding more stuff into these series might make it harder to review (the > axi-dac might have some fun ABI discussion :)). Ideally, we would have this > merged somewhere and then add users on top of it. It's fine to post a bunch of series with stated dependencies (I've gotten 5 series + deep in the past :) Obviously useful to have a git tree with them all on somewhere though but if you host that it would be ideal given you are driving this work in general. Jonathan > > - Nuno Sá
