Re: [PATCH v8 5/8] iio: adc: adi-axi-adc: add support for AXI ADC IP core

[Jonathan Cameron]

...

> > > > +#define REG_RSTN				0x0040  
> > > 
> > > Usual stuff: These should be prefixed with driver relevant prefix
> > > maybe ADI_AXI_  
> > 
> > my only concern [about the prefix] is that it makes the macro-names too long;
> > after re-looking at these reg definitions, what bothered me is that some of
> > the
> > bit-field-names collide; so i went with concatenanting reg-names + reg-
> > bitnames, 
> > which made them look too long [so i removed the prefix]
> > 
> > there's also the possibility of going back to the regmap-doc and shortening
> > these reg-name/bitnames;
> > but they've been like this for a while, and i admit going to the HDL team
> > makes
> > me sometimes lazy;
> > 
> > i'll re-add teh ADI_AXI prefix; and will see how these look  
> 
> i talked to HDL
> so, we'll have a round of renaming these [in the docs];
> 
> but now, i'm wondering if it's ok to drop the regs that are [currently] unused
> and add them when functionality gets later-added;

Absolutely.  Its in theory better to always do that, but sometimes it's
just easier to copy type the whole datasheet register map into a driver
so we tend to let it go.

> in the meantime, the names can be re-worked/shortened/prettify-ed;
> we'll also need to re-do an inventory of the current HDL IP cores and see how
> the regmaps hold-up/match against the docs;

I'd not worry too much on shortening these.  A bit of ugly code never
really hurt anyone if it's just a long define.

Of course, if it makes sense anyway, always good to tidy up naming.

Jonathan