From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7819EC54FCF for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 16:57:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE5F2074D for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 16:57:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1584896256; bh=Fdqxq266lPbGuDaZ/yl7AHdNhTLSHTmg63L7vb+eiTg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=cjDkbqoQHUDi3JBx48TSEitgJA78lze2TC+zuL9iQAmeQfxL3fLDI9RWDV+bKntzv OqZoNtv/8lK50aCxEfggIObfV5rvwRj2a+YyyXhSiEK7k2nQFABnV3DK+HiHp8zeb1 qErKX+geyzqEVpQ9abHkNI7L8WH15fPXTemQ/WgY= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726137AbgCVQ5f (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:57:35 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42088 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725785AbgCVQ5f (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:57:35 -0400 Received: from archlinux (cpc149474-cmbg20-2-0-cust94.5-4.cable.virginm.net [82.4.196.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7018C206F8; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 16:57:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1584896255; bh=Fdqxq266lPbGuDaZ/yl7AHdNhTLSHTmg63L7vb+eiTg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=xcTrgHu932AP0DbnZ1vvDF6/PoTrapK+LGnaRqhJ2hoWJ+P6ZAm8OkYTHpEsu7fcu S/KAOii/yQW2EJ4H2Z0Cby+tK5DREd6SuJETkrEinsGfHL5LuzJE3hx3SUhKe9zkVX Y/NcgIygxrIfMwrXR0D84rZqE/yuzAOORHgiwXyI= Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 16:57:30 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Alexandru Lazar Cc: "Ardelean, Alexandru" , "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "knaack.h@gmx.de" , "linux-iio@vger.kernel.org" , "pmeerw@pmeerw.net" , "lars@metafoo.de" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: adc: Add MAX1241 device tree bindings in documentation Message-ID: <20200322165730.11fa376a@archlinux> In-Reply-To: <20200322160604.GA222611@leena.republic> References: <20200320150114.9297-1-alazar@startmail.com> <20200320150114.9297-2-alazar@startmail.com> <20200321173412.52548ef1@archlinux> <20200321193541.GA16892@leena.republic> <1e51c4079222858410e9fe94c9d7f21d99abfe15.camel@analog.com> <20200322095317.GA3099@leena.republic> <20200322152735.36cb3493@archlinux> <20200322160604.GA222611@leena.republic> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 22 Mar 2020 18:06:04 +0200 Alexandru Lazar wrote: > > You'd be surprised how often this gets added to drivers precisely because > > people will put it on a controllable supply. It may well not have it's own > > supply but it may share one with a bunch of other external chips and > > all of them need to use the regulator framework controls to make sure it's > > only disabled when they are all suspended etc. > > I figured it might be something like this :-). I've added the vdd-supply > binding in v5. > > If this isn't something that can be easily handled in the core, do you > think we can document it somewhere as a convention/common idiom? > (Assuming it's not already documented, of course). It seems like it's > something that all IIO devices would need. I can do the writing part. Hmm. We could do with a sort of 'things you'd normally find in a driver' document. We don't have such a document, but interesting to think about what would be in it... Perhaps a 'best practice' document would be a better way of putting it. I don't really want to see a huge number of patches adding regulators to drivers that don't have them already for example. Clearly no one needed them yet :) If you want to take a stab at such a document that would be great. Jonathan > > Thanks, > Alex