linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] IIO wrapper drivers, dpot-dac and envelope-detector

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <923bbaf8-f065-bc05-1f9a-ed703d6746f3@kernel.org>
Date:   Sat, 22 Oct 2016 15:27:47 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To:     Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] IIO wrapper drivers, dpot-dac and envelope-detector

On 20/10/16 16:29, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 10/20/2016 04:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> [...]
>> Good idea! Then the "envelope-detector,inverted" bool can go, and be
>> implied by the compatible string. If some way to rebind the irq trigger
>> is later discovered that can be added as a channel attr without
>> deprecating any dt bindings stuff. While at it, the other properties
>> ("envelope-detector,dac-max" and "envelope-detector,comp-interval-ms")
>> could also be implied from the compatible string. Would that be better?
>> I think so.
>>
>> But, the compatible string is one thing and the driver name is another.
>> "axentia,tse850-envelope-detector" doesn't seem like the best of driver
>> names...
> 
> The driver name is not that important we can still change that later if we
> have to, the DT compatible string on the other hand is fixed.
> 
>>
>> Are there any existing examples of drivers for (generic) things built
>> with discrete components like this that could perhaps provide guidance?
> 
> Not that I'm aware of.
> 
Me neither.  Always interesting to break new ground ;)

J