Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] Documentation: ABI: added filter mode doc in sysfs-bus-iio

Andy Shevchenko
2024-09-13T17:36:41Z

On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 02:06:48PM +0000, Nechita, Ramona wrote:
> >>
> >> The filter mode / filter type property is used for ad4130 and ad7779
> >> drivers, therefore the ABI doc file for ad4130 was removed, merging
> >> both of them in the sysfs-bus-iio.

...

> >> +What: /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:deviceX/filter_type_available
> >> +What: /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:deviceX/in_voltage-voltage_filter_mode_available
> >> +KernelVersion: 6.1
> >
> >I believe I have already commented on this. The commit message keeps silent about version changes. Why?
>
> I mentioned it in the cover-letter, since the attributes of two devices were
> merged, and one of them was available in 6.1 ad the other in 6.2, it felt
> appropriate to leave it as 6.1.
> I was wondering if this is ok or if it should be kept as 6.2. Should this be
> mentioned in the commit message as well?

Please, mention in the commit message.

> >> +Contact: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
> >> +Description:
> >> + Reading returns a list with the possible filter modes. Options
> >> + for the attribute:
> >> + * "sinc3" - The digital sinc3 filter. Moderate 1st conversion time.
> >> + Good noise performance.
> >> + * "sinc4" - Sinc 4. Excellent noise performance. Long
> >> + 1st conversion time.
> >> + * "sinc5" - The digital sinc5 filter. Excellent noise performance
> >> + * "sinc4+sinc1" - Sinc4 + averaging by 8. Low 1st conversion
> >> + time.
> >> + * "sinc3+rej60" - Sinc3 + 60Hz rejection.
> >> + * "sinc3+sinc1" - Sinc3 + averaging by 8. Low 1st conversion
> >> + time.
> >> + * "sinc3+pf1" - Sinc3 + device specific Post Filter 1.
> >> + * "sinc3+pf2" - Sinc3 + device specific Post Filter 2.
> >> + * "sinc3+pf3" - Sinc3 + device specific Post Filter 3.
> >> + * "sinc3+pf4" - Sinc3 + device specific Post Filter 4.
> >
> >Also, the original file was more verbose for the complex cases, like
> >"sinc3+pfX", why has this been changed?
>
> Since this is a more generic file I was advised to leave out specific
> details, should I include them just as they were in the original file?

I would leave the examples for the mentioned chip in the parentheses. But it's
up to Jonathan, I have no such device anyway, so personally I'm not affected
:-)

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko