linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: iio: adc: ad7768-1: add new supported parts

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: <e98ed14b-ed97-4e1c-a758-97b9bfc8ded4@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 15:12:29 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Santos <Jonathan.Santos@...log.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Michael.Hennerich@...log.com, lars@...afoo.de,
 jic23@...nel.org, dlechner@...libre.com, nuno.sa@...log.com,
 andy@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: iio: adc: ad7768-1: add new supported
 parts

On 31/08/2025 05:43, Jonathan Santos wrote:
>>>      maxItems: 1
>>> @@ -58,6 +66,18 @@ properties:
>>>      description:
>>>        ADC reference voltage supply
>>>  
>>> +  adi,gain-milli:
>>> +    description: |
>>> +       Specifies the gain applied by the Analog Anti-Aliasing Filter (AAF) to the
>>> +       ADC input (in milli units). The hardware gain is determined by which input
>>
>>
>> I don't think there is no such thing as "milli units". milli is SI
>> prefix, not unit. So "units" is the unit? Or how exactly?
>>
>> Basis points were before since 2022 so I don't get why these other
>> bindings introduced in 2024 could not use it?
>>
>> Anyway, if you ever do not apply reviewers comment, then your commit msg
>> should explain this. Otherwise you get the same discussion here.
>>
> 
> Yes, you are right. We shouldn't use milli as suffix. However, may I
> suggest another option?
> 
> I believe -permille is more appropriate because it represents a 1/1000
> proportion, which gives the precision we need to cover all values.
> 
> so it would be something like: adi,aaf-gain-permille
> 
> Is that ok for you?
> 
> Thanks for the feedback,
> Jonathan S.


What's wrong with existing unit I pointed out before?

BTW, any idea why your reply-to header is completely corrupted (copies
in-reply-to...)?


Best regards,
Krzysztof