Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] iio: adc: ad4851: add ad485x driver

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 16:14:27 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 12:40:40PM +0300, Antoniu Miclaus wrote:
> > Add support for the AD485X a fully buffered, 8-channel simultaneous
> > sampling, 16/20-bit, 1 MSPS data acquisition system (DAS) with
> > differential, wide common-mode range inputs.  
> 
> ...
> 
> > +config AD4851
> > +	tristate "Analog Device AD4851 DAS Driver"
> > +	depends on SPI
> > +	select REGMAP_SPI
> > +	select IIO_BACKEND
> > +	help
> > +	  Say yes here to build support for Analog Devices AD4851, AD4852,
> > +	  AD4853, AD4854, AD4855, AD4856, AD4857, AD4858, AD4858I high speed
> > +	  data acquisition system (DAS).  
> 
> I think I already commented on this... Anyway, it's much better to support when
> this list is broke down on per device per line. In such a case it's less churn
> if we need to remove or add an entry in the future.
> 
> > +	  To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be
> > +	  called ad4851.  
> 
> Also, with all these devices to be supported why not ad485x as the name of
> the driver? Is it a preference by the IIO subsystem?

Don't.  We've been bitten by too many cases of manufacturers noticing
a hole in their part numbers and 'slotting' something unrelated in.
So it just causes confusion.  Hence strong preference for any new code
is pick a name from the list.  The wild card also implies restrictions
that tend to break overtime when other part numbers outside the range
are used.  Not using a wildcard keeps it consistently wrong so people
get used to it :)

> 
> ...
> 
> > +#include <asm/unaligned.h>  
> 
> linux/unaligned nowadays (I learnt it quite recently).
> (It requires v6.12-rc2).

Yup.  That bit me in the IIO tree 3 times so far. I've
merged rc2 in for that reason.