From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com>
Cc: knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: Add IIO support for the DAC on the Apex Embedded Systems STX104
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:55:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56BB87B1.3030806@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160210021904.GA13466@sophia>
On 10/02/16 02:19, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 10:37:09PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> My only real question is on the naming of the module parameter.
>> Is it the equivalent of the io address that a load of ISA
>> radio drivers seem to use? (fed to me by grepping isa_register_driver)
>> If so perhaps that's the 'standard' name as much as one exists for this?
>
> Yes, you noted correctly that the stx104_base module parameter fulfills
> the same function as the io module parameter used in many of the radio
> drivers: it's an array holding the io port address of each device.
> However, I find "io" to be a rather vague module parameter name, so I've
> decided to use the more apt "stx104_base" name for my array of base
> addresses.
>
> As you've probably noticed, there are few ISA drivers existing in the
> kernel baseline currently, so not much of a standard is set yet. I'm all
> right with renaming the module parameter if you have a preference, just
> as long as the name is more informative than simply "io."
>
> For what it's worth, this driver is part of a series of PC/104 drivers
> I've been submitting to various subsystems (in the hopes of improving
> the lack of PC/104 support in the baseline Linux kernel); see
> drivers/gpio/gpio-104-idio-16.c and drivers/gpio/gpio-104-idi-48.c for
> example. I have thus far been following the convention of naming the
> base address module parameter as "modname_base," where "modname" is the
> respective module name.
I've been trying to work out if IO ports is a generic enough ISA term
to take the view that anyone using an ISA card should know about it...
I certainly know the I/O space approach to interacting with PCI cards is
well understood in people working with shall we say 'dumb' PCI hardware.
I guess I don't really care all that much on this though - just nice to
be consistent / general when possible.
Jonathan
>
> William Breathitt Gray
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-10 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-08 17:50 [PATCH v2] iio: Add IIO support for the DAC on the Apex Embedded Systems STX104 William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-09 22:37 ` Jonathan Cameron
2016-02-10 2:19 ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-10 18:55 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2016-02-10 21:22 ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-10 22:46 ` Jonathan Cameron
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56BB87B1.3030806@kernel.org \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=vilhelm.gray@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.