Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210910130337.2025426-1-osk@google.com> <71c17c47-ca9e-e9d2-7b89-cc25b512c06a@roeck-us.net>
 <CABoTLcRZ43EUVzbqWniu64PkB7Yx4RMYKjaBxaSihk+k0Ca-gA@mail.gmail.com>
 <722b27f6-4390-9b5b-f6f2-75ce9e967d12@roeck-us.net> <CABoTLcSdkmuBxd5Yh6z2Oqm1-_Vd4J5Ni1i1qq5s07mWu7Ndew@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210914150859.GB3457579@roeck-us.net> <CABoTLcQfS5-UL92NR9vbc2YrGJv3oQPYCqAm-diNoq-tkHP_hQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c410eba9-f6cf-4dbf-797f-48afde9c1898@roeck-us.net> <CABoTLcQWXerMWPvWUqjykiNcx9oGoP8aEcuDwcQ36yu-CBc0pA@mail.gmail.com>
 <382858f5-e833-d4b9-f189-449671992ba5@roeck-us.net> <CABoTLcST=74wRbtMA2SdmeHd0WmU7id05ouSfw4PFw2nJt_gLw@mail.gmail.com>
 <9869ed19-b8ab-d9e5-e791-a02eeb2c5eed@roeck-us.net>
In-Reply-To: <9869ed19-b8ab-d9e5-e791-a02eeb2c5eed@roeck-us.net>
From:   Oskar Senft <osk@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Sep 2021 16:10:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CABoTLcS6krUnqDU7=1+_wBPoGN==VfmZHDQ4rWVZUv7c3ExNkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: hwmon: Add nct7802 bindings
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc:     linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

> I think there was a reason for "sensors", because there can be other
> bindings on the same level. Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/ltc2978.txt
> lists "regulators", for example.
>
> Where did you find the "sensors" example for ltc2978 ? I don't see it
> in the upstream kernel. Or was that derived from the official "regulators"
> bindings ?

Yes, I just followed the structure from there, renaming "regulators"
as "sensors".


> Yes, let's do that. I'd like us to keep the "sensors" subnode to have a clear
> association and differentiator to other sub-nodes such as "regulators".
> Open is if we can use "temperature-sensor@0" or if it would have to be
> a chip specific "ltd", but I think we can sort that out after suggesting
> an initial set of bindings to Rob.
Makes sense, I'll do that. Now I just need to figure out how to
express that in YAML ...

I'll send a new patch as soon as I figured that out and got it to work.

Thanks for your input!

Oskar.