[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cover.1754041258.git.mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 13:06:46 +0300
From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/2] iio: adc: ad7476: Simplifications
This series suggests some simplifications to the ad7476 ADC. It is
currently 100% untested, and shouldn't be merged as is. I'd like to hear
opinions on these changes before adding support to the ROHM BD79105 ADC.
Intention of the patch 1 is pretty trivial. I'd just like to hear if
people think the enum + ID table approach is preferred over direct
pointers to IC specific structs in SPI device's driver_data.
Real reason for the RFC version is the patch 2. It aims to clear the
supply handling logic. I did also an alternate version which requires
the names of the regulators to be provided in the chip_data:
https://github.com/M-Vaittinen/linux/commit/cf5b3078feb17f9a0069b2c7c86f6d980e879356
I believe the version in the link --^
is clearer, but it can potentially help people to add issues with supply
enable ordering.
I can't still say if the patch 2 contained in this series is better, or
if the one behind the link is better way to go. So, RFC it is :)
Matti Vaittinen (2):
iio: adc: ad7476: Simplify chip type detection
iio: adc: ad7476: Simplify scale handling
drivers/iio/adc/ad7476.c | 376 +++++++++++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 164 insertions(+), 212 deletions(-)
--
2.50.1
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists