[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkda6ENy1yCQQdsxBnp+RvqgvgG73xHNt07Pd32YfzRQ75Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 11:42:19 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Kim Seer Paller <kimseer.paller@...log.com>, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: gpio: add adg1414
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 7:16 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 13/02/2025 14:15, Kim Seer Paller wrote:
> > +maintainers:
> > + - Kim Seer Paller <kimseer.paller@...log.com>
> > +
> > +description:
> > + The ADG1414 is a 9.5 Ω RON ±15 V/+12 V/±5 V iCMOS serially-controlled
> > + octal SPST switches.
> > +
> > +properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + enum:
> > + - adi,adg14140-gpio
>
>
> Is ADG1414 anything else than GPIO? Where are the rest of the bindings then?
I read the spec and it is actually an SPI-controlled switch.
(As in "power switch", not "network switch".)
It's a bit interesting since we have no "switch" subsystem, but there
is "mux".
The question is whether this should be considered some kind of
"gpio" (due to the nature of switches being off/on) in order to not
complicate our world too much or if we need to create a whole
new device class for switches.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists