Add a devicetree documentation for the ad5933 and ad5934 impedance
converter, network analyzer.
Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
---
.../iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..d9ae2babf016
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+Analog Devices AD5933/AD5934 Impedance Converter, Network Analyzer
+
+https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5933.pdf
+https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5934.pdf
+
+Required properties:
+ - compatible : should be one of
+ "adi,ad5933"
+ "adi,ad5934"
+ - reg : the I2C address
+ - vdd-supply : supply reference for the device.
+
+Optional properties:
+ - vref_mv : default voltage reference.
+ - ext_clk_hz : external master clock for the system.
+
+Example:
+
+ impedance-analyzer@0d {
+ compatible = "adi,ad5933";
+ reg = <0x0d>;
+ vdd-supply = <&vdd_supply>;
+ };
--
2.17.1
On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 02:57:12PM -0200, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
> Add a devicetree documentation for the ad5933 and ad5934 impedance
> converter, network analyzer.
>
> Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
checkpatch spits out:
WARNING: Non-standard signature: Co-Developed-by:
Co-developed-by Vs Co-Developed-by ?
Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst: - Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:12) When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-Developed-by:
Confusing! Don't know which one is correct.
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
> ---
Use `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl <your_patch>` to list the DT
maintainers and the relevant mailing list.
--
Himanshu Jha
Undergraduate Student
Department of Electronics & Communication
Guru Tegh Bahadur Institute of Technology
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 00:20 +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 02:57:12PM -0200, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
> > Add a devicetree documentation for the ad5933 and ad5934 impedance
> > converter, network analyzer.
> >
> > Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
>
> checkpatch spits out:
>
> WARNING: Non-standard signature: Co-Developed-by:
>
> Co-developed-by Vs Co-Developed-by ?
>
> Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst: - Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:12) When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-Developed-by:
>
> Confusing! Don't know which one is correct.
I think neither one.
What's the real purpose or value of it?
There isn't one as far as I can tell.
Just use Signed-off-by:
Or maybe add multiple "Authored-by:" if
anyone is all that concerned about authorship
crediting...
>
> > Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> Use `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl <your_patch>` to list the DT
> maintainers and the relevant mailing list.
>
>
On Sun, 2 Dec 2018 14:57:12 -0200
Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]> wrote:
> Add a devicetree documentation for the ad5933 and ad5934 impedance
> converter, network analyzer.
>
> Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
Put this in line below Gabriel's sign off - it makes script
parsing of these easier.
Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
> ---
> .../iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..d9ae2babf016
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> +Analog Devices AD5933/AD5934 Impedance Converter, Network Analyzer
> +
> +https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5933.pdf
> +https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5934.pdf
> +
> +Required properties:
> + - compatible : should be one of
> + "adi,ad5933"
> + "adi,ad5934"
> + - reg : the I2C address
> + - vdd-supply : supply reference for the device.
> +
> +Optional properties:
> + - vref_mv : default voltage reference.
Regulator framework rather than a simple voltage.
> + - ext_clk_hz : external master clock for the system.
Please use the clocks framework for this rather than rolling our own.
There are fixed clocks to cover the common case, but it may be supplied by
something smarter.
> +
> +Example:
> +
> + impedance-analyzer@0d {
> + compatible = "adi,ad5933";
> + reg = <0x0d>;
> + vdd-supply = <&vdd_supply>;
> + };
On Sun, 02 Dec 2018 15:22:15 -0800
Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 00:20 +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 02:57:12PM -0200, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
> > > Add a devicetree documentation for the ad5933 and ad5934 impedance
> > > converter, network analyzer.
> > >
> > > Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
> >
> > checkpatch spits out:
> >
> > WARNING: Non-standard signature: Co-Developed-by:
> >
> > Co-developed-by Vs Co-Developed-by ?
> >
> > Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst: - Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
> > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:12) When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-Developed-by:
> >
> > Confusing! Don't know which one is correct.
>
> I think neither one.
>
> What's the real purpose or value of it?
> There isn't one as far as I can tell.
>
> Just use Signed-off-by:
>
> Or maybe add multiple "Authored-by:" if
> anyone is all that concerned about authorship
> crediting...
This is output of pair programming so only fair to acknowledge
both developers (or more if a larger group). Right now
we have a guide that says Co-developed-by is the way to do that.
I would stick to that. If people feel something else makes sense
then they should propose a change to the documentation and
hopefully we can reach some agreement on this.
I'm happy with Co-developed-by in IIO as I think it's a fair
reflection of what happened. Authored-by would be fine but
isn't a standard tag documented anywhere.
Jonathan
>
>
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> >
> > Use `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl <your_patch>` to list the DT
> > maintainers and the relevant mailing list.
> >
> >
>