Re: [PATCH v3] dt-bindings: iio: adc: ad7923: adjust documentation

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 21/11/2022 13:45, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:45:32 +0100
> Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:31:33AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 21/11/2022 11:26, Edmund Berenson wrote:  
>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 10:13:57AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:  
>>>>> On 20/11/2022 18:06, Edmund Berenson wrote:  
>>>>>> - Add the ad7927 compatibility string, with fallback compatibility
>>>>>> to ad7928.
>>>>>> - ad7923 and ad7924 are treated the same in the driver, show
>>>>>> the relationship in the documentation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggested-by: Lukasz Zemla <Lukasz.Zemla@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------  
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not respond with new patch to some old thread. Each patchset starts a
>>>>> new thread.
>>>>>  
>>>> Sorry I didn't know this is the preferred way. I will send new patch
>>>> version as new thread in the future.  
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml
>>>>>> index 07f9d1c09c7d..e553853e25d5 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ maintainers:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  description: |
>>>>>>    Analog Devices AD7904, AD7914, AD7923, AD7924 4 Channel ADCs, and AD7908,
>>>>>> -   AD7918, AD7928 8 Channels ADCs.
>>>>>> +   AD7918, AD7927, AD7928 8 Channels ADCs.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    Specifications about the part can be found at:
>>>>>>      https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD7923.pdf
>>>>>> @@ -20,14 +20,22 @@ description: |
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  properties:
>>>>>>    compatible:
>>>>>> -    enum:
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7904
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7914
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7923
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7924
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7908
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7918
>>>>>> -      - adi,ad7928
>>>>>> +    oneOf:
>>>>>> +      - enum:
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7904
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7914
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7908  
>>>>>
>>>>> You already started shuffling the entries, so make them ordered. What's
>>>>> the point of changing the order from one non-sorted to another non-sorted?
>>>>>  
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7918
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7923
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7924  
>>>>>
>>>>> Then deprecate this as alone compatible.
>>>>>  
>>>>>> +          - adi,ad7927> +          - adi,ad7928  
>>>>>
>>>>> Ditto
>>>>>  
>>>>>> +      - items:
>>>>>> +          - const: adi,ad7923
>>>>>> +          - const: adi,ad7924  
>>>>>
>>>>> I would expect lower number as fallback.  
>>>> If I remove alone compatibility of 7924 and 7927 in the documentation,  
>>>
>>> I don't understand. 7924 and 7927 are not compatible with each other -
>>> neither in old code nor in new - so what do you want to remove?
>>>   
>>>> I will have to remove explicit compatibility match on the driver side,
>>>> correct?
>>>> Just want to make sure I don't misunderstand you.  
>>>
>>> My comment to which you responded was about order of items. Usually
>>> lower number means older device and usually older device is the fallback.  
> 
> Oldest in which sense?  I think it should be oldest in order of having
> a binding defined, not in order of part releases (and ADI seem to scramble
> part numbers fairly randomly so definitely not generally the case that
> ordering of numbers has anything much to do with age of part).

Older in a meaning of design by ADI. Of course I have no clue whether
this matches incremental numbers...

Best regards,
Krzysztof