[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bfa786b6-fe62-a5fb-718f-bb9e95b1f051@xilinx.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 07:21:05 +0200
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Franz Forstmayr <forstmayr.franz@...il.com>
Cc: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] hwmon: (ina2xx) Add support for ina260
On 26. 02. 20 3:16, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 2/24/20 3:26 PM, Franz Forstmayr wrote:
>> Add initial support for INA260 power monitor with integrated shunt.
>> Registers are different from other INA2xx devices, that's why a small
>> translation table is used.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Franz Forstmayr <forstmayr.franz@...il.com>
>
> I think the chip is sufficiently different to other chips that a separate
> driver would make much more sense than adding support to the existing
> driver.
> There is no calibration, registers are different, the retry logic is
> not needed. A new driver could use the with_info API and would be much
> simpler while at the same time not messing up the existing driver.
Isn't it also better to switch to IIO framework?
As we discussed in past there are two ina226 drivers. One in hwmon and
second based on IIO framework (more advance one?) and would be good to
deprecate hwmon one.
That's why separate driver is necessary.
Thanks,
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists