Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: Add support for TI ADC1x8s102

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 12:53 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2017-04-25 11:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:


> > > Where is a good example? Sorry,
> > > I still don't see how to make code out of your comments.
> > 
> > Mostly remove those ugly hacks and start over.
> 
> Still not a constructive answer.

You just didn't get.

Provide a driver without that ugly code and then we may think how to
make it work on existing boards without too much intrusion here or
there.

> > CS is a property of the host controller, not the slave devices.
> > 
> > Once I pointed to Mika's work for Galileo, perhaps you forgot. The
> > below is an example how to fix ACPI table using
> > 
> > https://github.com/westeri/meta-acpi/blob/master/recipes-bsp/acpi-ta
> > bles/samples/galileo/spi.asl
> > 
> > It's done for SPI1, but you easily can convert it to SPI0 and
> > corresponding properties.
> 
> So that information would be picked up by the existing SPI host
> controller driver, and we don't need anything beyond basic ACPI
> support
> in this driver?

Correct!

>  That is indeed appealing. Maybe we can make the board
> patch private then, until a firmware update is available. I'll split
> that part off.

Yes, that is what I meant.

> > Btw, we welcome any contribution to meta-acpi repository!
> 
> Shipping own DSDTs is no long-term path: we would be forced to provide
> separate images due to a single parameter being different in the DSDTs
> of the 2020 and 2040. And you cannot provide any overlay to adjust the
> table after boot, i.e. once we know on which board we are.
> 
> The dependency on meta-intel is also suboptimal (we will switch to a
> long-term supported kernel source soon), but that would probably be
> fixable.

Mika, do you have anything to comment on the above?

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy