RE: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: temperature: Add ADT7604 support to adi,ltc2983

From: Stan, Liviu

Date: Thu May 07 2026 - 05:16:57 EST


On Wed, May 06, 2026, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > I have to wonder if this is the right approach, if it's the same device
> > > just with a different label and advertised purpose.
> >
> > Could you expand on this? Are you suggesting the copper-trace@ and
> > leak-detector@ node types aren't needed, or something about the overall
> > approach of adding ADT7604 to the existing ltc2983 binding? I want to
> > make sure I understand the concern.
>
> Yeah, if it is the same device, just with different uses for the same
> pins, I was wondering whether the correct approach is to reuse the
> existing child nodes, with some way of indicating what they are
> measuring (e.g. use the compatible to decide). I think Jonathan
> expressed a similar sentiment.

Yes, as I replied to Jonathan, I think the only bigger issue would be
the adi,custom-rtd and adi,custom-thermistor being required for sensor
type 18 and 27 respectively, but I am happy to go whichever way you prefer.

> > > Pedantry perhaps, but isn't this an "ohmmeter"?
> >
> > For the naming I followed the convention used in this binding: rtd@,
> > thermocouple@, diode@ are named after what they are, not what
> > they measure. copper-trace@ names the component being sensed.
> Jonathan
>
> An "ohmmeter" is what it is, not what it measures. What it measures
> would be "ohms".

You're right, my mistake. I used the sensor type names in the datasheet. But if
we end up reusing rtd@ and thermistor@, the naming question resolves
itself anyway.

> > > Are these ever linked in a different way?
> > > Ditto here and in the rtd node. Are these fixed linkages or actually
> > > dynamic?
>
> Please don't trim this aggressively, you've removed the context for what
> this is about, and it was 2 weeks ago so there's no way I remember what
> it was.

I'm sorry, I'll keep more context in future replies.

> > The linkage is board-dependent. Any rsense on channels 2-20 can be
> > paired with any sensor channel in that range. The example uses two
> > separate sense resistors because the copper trace and leak detector
> > channels need different values (100Ω vs 10kΩ, these are the recommended
> > values in the datasheet).
>
> This question of mine is fairly moot anyway, given the existing child
> nodes all have have it, especially if there ends up being reuse of them,
> so you can ignore this comment.

Noted, thank you.

Thanks,
Liviu