From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com>
Cc: knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: Add IIO support for the DAC on the Apex Embedded Systems STX104
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:55:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56BB87B1.3030806@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160210021904.GA13466@sophia>
On 10/02/16 02:19, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 10:37:09PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> My only real question is on the naming of the module parameter.
>> Is it the equivalent of the io address that a load of ISA
>> radio drivers seem to use? (fed to me by grepping isa_register_driver)
>> If so perhaps that's the 'standard' name as much as one exists for this?
>
> Yes, you noted correctly that the stx104_base module parameter fulfills
> the same function as the io module parameter used in many of the radio
> drivers: it's an array holding the io port address of each device.
> However, I find "io" to be a rather vague module parameter name, so I've
> decided to use the more apt "stx104_base" name for my array of base
> addresses.
>
> As you've probably noticed, there are few ISA drivers existing in the
> kernel baseline currently, so not much of a standard is set yet. I'm all
> right with renaming the module parameter if you have a preference, just
> as long as the name is more informative than simply "io."
>
> For what it's worth, this driver is part of a series of PC/104 drivers
> I've been submitting to various subsystems (in the hopes of improving
> the lack of PC/104 support in the baseline Linux kernel); see
> drivers/gpio/gpio-104-idio-16.c and drivers/gpio/gpio-104-idi-48.c for
> example. I have thus far been following the convention of naming the
> base address module parameter as "modname_base," where "modname" is the
> respective module name.
I've been trying to work out if IO ports is a generic enough ISA term
to take the view that anyone using an ISA card should know about it...
I certainly know the I/O space approach to interacting with PCI cards is
well understood in people working with shall we say 'dumb' PCI hardware.
I guess I don't really care all that much on this though - just nice to
be consistent / general when possible.
Jonathan
>
> William Breathitt Gray
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-10 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-08 17:50 [PATCH v2] iio: Add IIO support for the DAC on the Apex Embedded Systems STX104 William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-09 22:37 ` Jonathan Cameron
2016-02-10 2:19 ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-10 18:55 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2016-02-10 21:22 ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-10 22:46 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=56BB87B1.3030806@kernel.org \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=vilhelm.gray@gmail.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).