[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190312163930.GA30288@bogus>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:39:30 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Andreas Klinger <ak@...klinger.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com, afaerber@...e.de,
arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
johan@...nel.org, khilman@...libre.com, knaack.h@....de,
lars@...afoo.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com, mchehab+samsung@...nel.org,
m.othacehe@...il.com, nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com,
pmeerw@...erw.net, songqiang1304521@...il.com, treding@...dia.com,
techsupport@...botix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] dt-bindings: maxbotix,i2cxl: Add MaxBotix i2c
ultrasonic rangers
On Sat, Mar 02, 2019 at 06:26:39PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 14:42:27 +0100
> Andreas Klinger <ak@...klinger.de> wrote:
>
> > Add doc for dt binding maxbotix,i2cxl. This binding is for MaxBotix
> > I2CXL-MaxSonar ultrasonic rangers which share a common i2c interface.
>
> I'm a bit confused on the naming. Certainly the binding should have
> separate entries for each supported part, rather than a group one
> for their i2cxl naming. Having said that they do have a wide
> range of parts with only the one datasheet.
>
> Rob, what do you think? Go with this i2cxl naming
> or list the individual supported parts?
Looks like the difference is mainly just the range. Is that something
s/w needs to know about?
>
> mb1202, mb1212, mb1222, mb1232, mb1242, mb7040,
> mb7137?
OTOH, that's not really too many.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists