linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] dt-bindings: iio: dac: adi-axi-dac: add ad3552r axi variant

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: <20241012144950.435815b4@jic23-huawei>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 14:49:50 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@...libre.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Michael Hennerich
 <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>, Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>, Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@...s.st.com>,
 Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 dletchner@...libre.com, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] dt-bindings: iio: dac: adi-axi-dac: add
 ad3552r axi variant

On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 17:43:36 +0200
Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@...libre.com> wrote:

> From: Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@...libre.com>
> 
> Add a new compatible and related bindigns for the fpga-based
> "ad3552r" AXI IP core, a variant of the generic AXI DAC IP.
> 
> The AXI "ad3552r" IP is a very similar HDL (fpga) variant of the
> generic AXI "DAC" IP, intended to control ad3552r and similar chips,
> mainly to reach high speed transfer rates using a QSPI DDR
> (dobule-data-rate) interface.
> 
> The ad3552r device is defined as a child of the AXI DAC, that in
> this case is acting as an SPI controller.
> 
Hi Angelo,

If this goes to a v6, I'd suggest adding a very brief statement that
#io-backend is present because it is possible (in theory anyway) to
use a separate controller for the control path than that used for the
datapath. 

So a one line summary of that long discussion from an earlier version!
 
Otherwise this LGTM.

Thanks,

Jonathan