From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([94.23.32.191]:60884 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751827Ab2LTPvx (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:51:53 -0500 Message-ID: <50D3340F.3090209@free-electrons.com> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:51:43 +0100 From: Maxime Ripard MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "ludovic.desroches" CC: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Ferre Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: AT91: IIO: add low and high res support for adc References: <20121219183236.GP23971@game.jcrosoft.org> <1355942232-26251-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> <50D2EBA1.4050305@free-electrons.com> <50D2EDE6.3090706@atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <50D2EDE6.3090706@atmel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org Hi Ludovic, Le 20/12/2012 11:52, ludovic.desroches a écrit : >> I'm wondering, why are you using such a complex dt parsing code, and >> bindings, when you only requires a boolean to switch between 8 and 10 >> bits mode (which seem to be the only thing you support)? > > We will have a 10 and 12 bits mode on future ADCs and I would like to > have something which could manage more than two resolutions if it > happens one day. I see your point. I'm not fond at all of the existing bindings for the driver (putting things like registers offset in the dt is a non-sense to me, but hey...), so I'd like to still keep it as simple and non-bloated as possible, but it's true that in the current situation, we probably have no other choice. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:51:43 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: AT91: IIO: add low and high res support for adc In-Reply-To: <50D2EDE6.3090706@atmel.com> References: <20121219183236.GP23971@game.jcrosoft.org> <1355942232-26251-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> <50D2EBA1.4050305@free-electrons.com> <50D2EDE6.3090706@atmel.com> Message-ID: <50D3340F.3090209@free-electrons.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Ludovic, Le 20/12/2012 11:52, ludovic.desroches a ?crit : >> I'm wondering, why are you using such a complex dt parsing code, and >> bindings, when you only requires a boolean to switch between 8 and 10 >> bits mode (which seem to be the only thing you support)? > > We will have a 10 and 12 bits mode on future ADCs and I would like to > have something which could manage more than two resolutions if it > happens one day. I see your point. I'm not fond at all of the existing bindings for the driver (putting things like registers offset in the dt is a non-sense to me, but hey...), so I'd like to still keep it as simple and non-bloated as possible, but it's true that in the current situation, we probably have no other choice. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com