Re: [PATCH 5/6] dt-bindings: iio: temperature: ltc2983: document power supply

[Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2129 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 09:17:16AM +0100, Nuno Sá wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 17:54 +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 05:41:03PM +0100, Nuno Sá wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 15:40 +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 01:55:56PM +0100, Nuno Sa wrote:
> > > > > Add a property for the VDD power supply regulator.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@analog.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/temperature/adi,ltc2983.yaml | 2
> > > > > ++
> > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git
> > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/temperature/adi,ltc2983.yaml
> > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/temperature/adi,ltc2983.yaml
> > > > > index dbb85135fd66..8aae867a770a 100644
> > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/temperature/adi,ltc2983.yaml
> > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/temperature/adi,ltc2983.yaml
> > > > > @@ -57,6 +57,8 @@ properties:
> > > > >    interrupts:
> > > > >      maxItems: 1
> > > > >  
> > > > > +  vdd-supply: true
> > > > 
> > > > Although technically an ABI break, should we make this supply required?
> > > > It is, at the end of the day, required by the hardware for operation.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I thought about it but then realized it could break some existing users
> > > which is
> > > never a nice thing.
> > 
> > Could you explain what scenario it actually breaks a system (not
> > produces warnings with dtbs_check)?
> 
> Oh, I guess I could not explain myself :). I did not meant breaking the system
> (I'm aware of the dummy regulator) but I meant exactly what you mention above
> about dtbs_check. Like, if someone already validated a devicetree against the
> current bindings, that same devicetree will fail to validate now right? And I
> had the idea that we should not allow that... If not the case, I'm perfectly
> fine in making the supply required.

I think that's fine, the system will still work which is the important
part of the ABI.

Cheers,
Conor.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]