From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com>
Cc: hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com, lars@metafoo.de, robh+dt@kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] iio: adc: Kconfig: add SPI interface mention to AD7924 description
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2022 18:03:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221230180310.5978f5b6@jic23-huawei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221223135209.f46617b6f23ff9b60a85ebe7@hugovil.com>
On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 13:52:09 -0500
Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 14:12:32 +0000
> Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:36:08 -0500
> > Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com>
> > >
> > > The Analog Devices AD7924 uses an SPI interface. There is also a Texas
> > > Instruments ADS7924 which uses an I2C interface.
> > >
> > > Adding the SPI mention to the AD7924 will help to avoid confusion
> > > between the two chips.
> > Hi Hugo,
> >
> > Welcome to IIO.
> >
> > I don't really mind this, but given they have different part numbers
> > and the similarly named TI part could just have easily been SPI
> > I'm not sure the clarification is really useful.
> >
> > Also, under all the circumstances I can think of, if you can see the
> > help text you can also see the SPI dependence clearly listed.
> >
> > Hence I think is just noise, though I'm guessing it reflects a
> > confusion you ran into!
> >
> > Jonathan
>
> Hi Jonathan,
> yes, I initially tought that the TI ADS7924 was already supported because of the AD7924 entry. I wrongly assumed that the parts were similar and TI just renamed it because they bought Analog Devices. I am pretty sure that I am not the only one having made a similar error :)
>
Yikes. If TI bought ADI that would definitely be big news (my uninformed
guess it it would never get past competition authorities :)
I do vaguely wonder if long term we'll have to start naming drivers
with vendor prefixes as we will eventually get significant naming clashes.
Still I'm not keen to do it until we have a real problem.
> Of course, both chips differ not only because of their interface (SPI vs I2C), but also in their modes of operation and registers, interrupt pin presence (ADS7924), etc.
>
> But I can drop this patch if you want.
Will do,
Thanks,
Jonathan
>
> Hugo V.
>
>
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/iio/adc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/Kconfig b/drivers/iio/adc/Kconfig
> > > index 46c4fc2fc534..235319546974 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/Kconfig
> > > @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ config AD7923
> > > select IIO_TRIGGERED_BUFFER
> > > help
> > > Say yes here to build support for Analog Devices
> > > - AD7904, AD7914, AD7923, AD7924 4 Channel ADCs.
> > > + AD7904, AD7914, AD7923, AD7924 4 Channel SPI ADCs.
> > >
> > > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the
> > > module will be called ad7923.
> >
> >
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-30 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-22 20:36 [PATCH v1 0/3] iio: adc: ti-ads7924: add ADS7924 driver Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-22 20:36 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] iio: adc: Kconfig: add SPI interface mention to AD7924 description Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-23 14:12 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-12-23 18:52 ` Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-30 18:03 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2022-12-22 20:36 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] iio: adc: ti-ads7924: add ADS7924 driver Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-23 14:47 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-10 15:38 ` Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-22 20:36 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] dt-bindings: iio: adc: add ADS7924 Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-23 8:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-12-23 14:09 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-12-23 17:56 ` Hugo Villeneuve
2022-12-23 14:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-12-23 19:24 ` Hugo Villeneuve
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=20221230180310.5978f5b6@jic23-huawei \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hugo@hugovil.com \
--cc=hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox