On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:23 AM, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > I had to port the LM75 driver to barebox just a few days ago and so came > up with exactly the same patch 2/7 and 3/7. I applied 1-3 right away. > Shucks! I had those three patches sitting on my laptop for a couple of weeks. Sorry for procrastinating with submitting them, could have saved you some trouble :-) > In my case I not only have a LM75 but also a PT100 connected to a > Microchip MCP3421 which in Linux is abstracted as a IIO device. IIO has > the advantage that it's more formalized and has it's own device tree > binding that allows to connect sensor devices with their consumers. I > picked some of the pieces from IIO and created something I called > iodevice. I'll post it in the next few days. One thing I am missing in > your approach is the readout of values as device parameters so that the > values can be evaluated in scripts. On the other hand you have a command > that allows to show the values of all sensors which I currently don't > have. Maybe we can distil the best of both approaches. I would be more than happy to work on combining our code. How about you go ahead and submit your framework/drivers and I'll rework TEMPMON and hwmon (should we rename the command?) patches to use it. I doubt there would be anything worth salvaging in my LM75 driver, so we can just drop that patch. Sounds good? Thanks, Andrey _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
