From: Slawomir Stepien <sst@poczta.fm>
To: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
Cc: Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
jic23@kernel.org, knaack.h@gmx.de, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: add driver for Microchip MCP414X/416X/424X/426X
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 21:02:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160316200251.GB6212@x220> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E9A4FB.5060507@metafoo.de>
On Mar 16, 2016 19:24, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 03/16/2016 05:25 PM, Slawomir Stepien wrote:
> > On Mar 16, 2016 13:30, Peter Meerwald-Stadler wrote:
> [...]
> >> plenty of the private API, some of which seems to be debug only?
> >> what is really needed to interact with a poti?
> >
> > I wanted to export both the non volatile and volatile memory addresses for wiper
> > position access. That is bare minimum for the poti to operate.
> >
> > But I also wanted to export additional features of this chip. That is way there
> > is increase and decrease API, and STATUS and TCON register access.
> >
>
> The important part about a framework and the associated device drivers
> is to expose the features of a device using a standardized interface so
> you can write generic applications/libraries and share infrastructure.
> If an application requires device specific knowledge to access the
> features of a device you may as well write a userspace driver using i2cdev.
>
> So when you are introducing new ABI it should at least follow the
> standard naming scheme. And also try to think whether this is a feature
> that is present in other similar devices and come up with a device
> independent way to expose this functionality.
>
> Let's start with the simple stuff, I don't really see the advantage of
> having separate inc/dec controls. This can be handled through the
> standard raw attribute. If the newly written value is one off from the
> previous one use inc/dec otherwise write it directly. And even then it
> might make sense to just ignore that and always write the raw value.
I've got your point. The version 2 will use only the IIO facilities. Then I will
try to build more based on that.
> > The memory_map API is a way to access all the not used by chip memory addresses.
> > This API I think could be deleted. But I still think that some people might find
> > it useful.
>
> This sounds more like it should maybe be exposed as a standard EEPROM
> device.
Not quite familiar with this, but will look into that.
Once more thank you for comments.
--
Slawomir Stepien
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-16 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-16 11:37 [PATCH] iio: add driver for Microchip MCP414X/416X/424X/426X Slawomir Stepien
2016-03-16 12:30 ` Peter Meerwald-Stadler
2016-03-16 16:25 ` Slawomir Stepien
2016-03-16 18:24 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2016-03-16 20:02 ` Slawomir Stepien [this message]
2016-03-16 18:28 ` Daniel Baluta
2016-03-16 20:04 ` Slawomir Stepien
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=20160316200251.GB6212@x220 \
--to=sst@poczta.fm \
--cc=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 \
/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