Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: ad74413r: add binding for digital input threshold

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 26/06/2023 10:15, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 23/06/2023 23.57, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 05:44:50PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 01:33:25PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml
>>>> index 590ea7936ad7..1f90ce3c7932 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/addac/adi,ad74413r.yaml
>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,14 @@ properties:
>>>>        Shunt (sense) resistor value in micro-Ohms.
>>>>      default: 100000000
>>>>  
>>>> +  digital-input-threshold-microvolt:
>>>
>>> Should this not have an adi vendor prefix, similar to
>>> "adi,digital-input-threshold-mode-fixed"?
>>
>> Yes.
> 
> OK. But I'm not really sure what the rules are for when such a prefix
> must be added, so some guidance would be appreciated. There's
> 
> - DO use a vendor prefix on device specific property names. Consider if
>   properties could be common among devices of the same class.
> 
> And my thinking was that a threshold for when a digital input should
> count as high/low would be a rather generic thing, so not particularly
> device specific.

Then find some more users of it.

> 
> Also, this very binding has a shunt-resistor-micro-ohms, and the
> individual channels have a drive-strength-microamp (granted, that latter
> one is a recent one of mine and may have slipped through review?). I can
> certainly understand that when a property specifies a raw value to put
> into some register (or field), that's very specific to that chip (or
> small family of chips) - the adi,ch-func properties fall into that category.

Best regards,
Krzysztof