Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: add exynos5 adc driver under iio framwork

[Naveen Krishna Ch]

On 24 January 2013 15:24, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 01/24/2013 01:42 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Lars,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> Few doubts regarding the mappings and child device handling.
> >>> Kindly, suggest me better methods.
> >>
> >> The patch looks mostly good now. As for the mappings, the problem is that we
> >> currently do not have any device tree bindings for IIO. So a proper solution
> >> would be to add dt bindings for IIO.
> >
> > Can you explain more how you think this would work?  It seems like
> > just having child nodes as platform drivers would be OK (to me) and
> > having them instantiated with of_platform_populate() seems reasonable.
> >
> > ...but the one thing that is missing is a way for children to get
> > access to the channel properly.
> >
> > The children have access to the ADC "struct device" (it is their
> > parent device) and have a channel number (their "reg" field), but
> > there is no API call to map this to a "struct iio_channel".  Is that
> > all that's needed in this case?  ...or are you envisioning something
> > more?
>
> Well, the idea is that the consumer doesn't need to know the channel number.
> That's what the mapping takes care of. It basically creates a consumer alias
> for the channel. When requesting the channel the consumer always uses the
> same name.
>
> iio_channel_get(dev_name(&pdev->dev), "voltage");
>
> And the mapping contains an entry which maps the tuple of device name and
> channel name to a real IIO channel which as been registered by a IIO device.
> Note if there is only one channel you can also just use NULL for the channel
> name. This is similar to how clocks are managed with the clk framework.
>
> Now for the dt bindings I think we should stick to something similar to what
> the clk framework does.
>
> E.g.
>
> adc: adc@12D10000 {
>
>         #io-channel-cells = <1>;
>         io-channel-output-names = "adc1", "adc2", ...;
>
>         ncp15wb473@0 {
>                 compatible = "ntc,ncp15wb473";
>                 ...
>                 io-channels = <&adc 0>; // First ADC channel
>                 io-channel-names = "voltage";
>         };
>
>         ncp15wb473@0 {
>                 compatible = "ntc,ncp15wb473";
>                 ...
>                 io-channels = <&adc 1>; // Second ADC channel
>                 io-channel-names = "voltage";
>         }
> };
>
Hello Lars,

I've a doubt here

How do i find the child dev_name for iio_map_array_register();

cause the child devices are probed during of_platform_populate();

and during the probe the child calls
iio_channel_get(dev_name(&pdev->dev), "voltage");

The child device nodes are ncp15wb473.0 and ncp15wb473.1 in this case.
But, this may change.

Kindly, help.

Assume we have a device tree like this

        adc@12D10000 {
                #io-channel-cells = <1>;
                io-channel-output-names = "adc0", "adc1", "adc2",
                                        "adc3", "adc4", "adc5",
                                "adc6", "adc7", "adc8", "adc9";

                ncp15wb473@0 {
                        compatible = "ntc,ncp15wb473";
                        reg = <0x0>;
                        io-channel-names = "voltage";
                        pullup-uV = <1800000>;
                        pullup-ohm = <47000>;
                        pulldown-ohm = <0>;
                };
                ncp15wb473@1 {
                        compatible = "ntc,ncp15wb473";
                        reg = <0x1>;
                        io-channel-names = "voltage";
                        pullup-uV = <1800000>;
                        pullup-ohm = <47000>;
                        pulldown-ohm = <0>;
                };

      };


> io-channel-output-names and io-channel-names can be optional. In the case
> where there is only one channel it's not really necessary to use
> io-channel-names.
>
> - Lars




--
Shine bright,
(: Nav :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/