Re: [PATCH v2] iio: humidity: am2315: add am2320 to i2c_device_id table

["Nicolás Antinori" <nico.antinori.7@gmail.com>]

On Mon Aug 10, 2026 at 4:28 PM -03, David Lechner wrote:
> On 8/10/26 1:32 PM, Nicolás Antinori wrote:
>> The AM2320 is fully compatible with the AM2315 sensor in terms of I2C
>> communication protocol and measurement conversions.
>>
>> Add the "am2320" entry to the i2c_device_id table.
>
> Interesting. No devicetree bindings for this one? What kind of
> system is it on?
>

I am testing this on a Raspberry Pi 3b mounted on a protoboard.

On Tue Aug 11, 2026 at 4:38 AM -03, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 11:36:48PM -0300, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
>> On 08/10, Nicolás Antinori wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> David's comment about the IIO device name sounds appropriate.
>> The am2315 driver might use a chip_info struct to hold the name of each specific design.
>> There are many drivers in IIO that already have such things.
>> drivers/iio/accel/adxl372_i2c.c is one example.
>> 
>> An alternative might be to use the device id.
>> 
>> 	const struct i2c_device_id *id = i2c_client_get_device_id(client);
>> 	...
>> 
>> 	indio_dev->name = id->name;
>> 
>> Not sure if the second option works well for both i2c and dt (probably not), so
>> I'd suggest the chip_info approach if you intend to add a device tree id table.
>
> Indeed, we suggest chip_info for the more robust approach when name is provided
> via string literals independently on the ID tables (as there maybe same ID in
> the tables for the slightly different devices that may be autodetected runtime,
> or different IDs for the same or fully compatible component; the chip_info works
> for the latter case).

Thank you all for the suggestions. I am going to try to implement 
chip_info struct.

I'll wait a little bit to send the v3 in case there are some more
comments on this version.

Regards,
Nicolás