Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <783221ff-7366-5a50-f022-8b7b8a21e998@metafoo.de>
References: <1515961960-35157-1-git-send-email-milan.o.stevanovic@gmail.com>
 <CAHp75Ve-WpJ6kqdW3WZFpO6pnSPdnVidVJ3EhOM+Fvs2AstQxw@mail.gmail.com> <783221ff-7366-5a50-f022-8b7b8a21e998@metafoo.de>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:43:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75VduLOcP2FULBMu7RoWaNke2k0=+c6L0z7c-3FqkRdMc1g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: adc: driver for ti adc081s/adc101s/adc121s
To:     Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
Cc:     Milan Stevanovic <milan.o.stevanovic@gmail.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@analog.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
        Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de> wrote:
> On 01/26/2018 07:19 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 10:32 PM, Milan Stevanovic
>> <milan.o.stevanovic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>     Add Linux device driver for TI single-channel CMOS
>>>     8/10/12-bit analog-to-digital converter with a
>>>     high-speed serial interface.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Milan Stevanovic <milan.o.stevanovic@gmail.com>
>>
>>> + * Analog Devices AD7466/7/8 AD7476/5/7/8 (A) SPI ADC driver
>>> + * TI ADC081S/ADC101S/ADC121S 8/10/12-bit SPI ADC driver
>>
>> Guys, I'm not sure I understood this mix.
>
> You often have the case where two or even more vendors produce parts that
> are (mostly) pin and register map compatible. This is typically to fulfill
> the second source requirement that some customers have.
>
> It is not uncommon to see drivers that support parts from different vendors.

Yep, though in this case we have, it seems, a counterpart (i2c
variant) in drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c

>> We have like few TI drivers here:
>>
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc0832.c:352:module_spi_driver(adc0832_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc084s021.c:269:module_spi_driver(adc084s021_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc108s102.c:343:module_spi_driver(adc108s102_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc12138.c:547:module_spi_driver(adc12138_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc128s052.c:211:module_spi_driver(adc128_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc161s626.c:276:module_spi_driver(ti_adc_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads7950.c:519:module_spi_driver(ti_ads7950_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads8688.c:481:module_spi_driver(ads8688_driver);
>> drivers/iio/adc/ti-tlc4541.c:266:module_spi_driver(tlc4541_driver);
>>
>> What's wrong with them?
>
> They are probably not register map compatible with those other drivers. (Or
> nobody cared to check if they are register map compatible).

I would believe in the latter than former.

>> Is it here code duplication between two vendors?

...and instead of doing such mix I would really rather have a separate
glue driver to the same code.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko