Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] regulator: dt-bindings: Add Linear Technology LTM8054 regulator

[Romain Gantois <romain.gantois@bootlin.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1679 bytes --]

On Sunday, 28 September 2025 00:31:05 CEST Conor Dooley wrote:
...
> > > 
> > > > +  lltc,fb-voltage-divider:
> > > Why does this property have a ?linear? vendor prefix?
> > > Shouldn't it be adi to match the other property and compatible?
> > 
> > This component was originally from Linear Technology, before it was
> > acquired by Analog Devices. The new properties and compatibles have the
> > Analog Devices prefix, but the "fb-voltage-divider" property is already
> > used by the LTC3676 and LTC3589 regulators, so I left the Linear
> > Technology prefix for this one to avoid introducing a new property just
> > to specify a vendor prefix change.
> > 
> > I don't have a strong opinion about this though.
> 
> Do they share the same driver?

They do not. However, they use it in the exact same way, and I would've
liked to factor out the handling of this property in a future patch. This
would also make it easier to handle other types of feedback pin circuits
and have a generic binding for "regulators using a feedback pin connected
to some kind of analog circuit".

For example:

Vout----+      
        |      
        |      
       +++     
       | |     
       | | Rtop
       | |     
       +++     
        |      
        |      
 FB ----+      
        |      
     +--+--+   
     |  |  |   
     |  |  |CCS
     +--v--+   
        |      
        |      
       -+-     
        -      
 
This is all speculation at this point though, so I don't mind changing the
property to "adi,fb-voltage-divider" and handling the different compatibles
when it comes to it.

Thanks,

-- 
Romain Gantois, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]