Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-71648-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240208172459.280189-1-alisa.roman@analog.com>
 <20240208172459.280189-6-alisa.roman@analog.com> <CAMknhBHU6k8J_PLCmGYF48S1q3uXByiCwzcd+B3q3Cd-02CUow@mail.gmail.com>
 <84546728-f0cb-4b38-a71c-e053b9b9278e@gmail.com> <CAMknhBFp-4s+-D8kD9rh0-OCc3gBs3hFX1EZ9ZmOifQOyGgUug@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240216142158.30e96c53@jic23-huawei> <CAMknhBEtLR1QNEv6HhcW35jiGEkx=srzy41NXt8bJ=gokzoemw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240217162510.5d5d4511@jic23-huawei>
In-Reply-To: <20240217162510.5d5d4511@jic23-huawei>
From: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 10:10:15 -0600
Message-ID: <CAMknhBF5mAsN1c-194Qwa5oKmqKzef2khXnqA1cSdKpWHKWp0w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] iio: adc: ad7192: Add AD7194 support
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: Alisa-Dariana Roman <alisadariana@gmail.com>, alexandru.tachici@analog.com, 
	alisa.roman@analog.com, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, 
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org, 
	lars@metafoo.de, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	michael.hennerich@analog.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, 
	Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@analog.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 10:25=E2=80=AFAM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org=
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 10:57:33 -0600
> David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 8:22=E2=80=AFAM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.=
org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:13:19 -0600
> > > David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > >
> > > > Tables 22, 23 and 24 in the AD7194 datasheet show that this chip is
> > > > much more configurable than AD7192 when it comes to assigning
> > > > channels. There are basically no restrictions on which inputs can b=
e
> > > > used together. So I am still confident that my suggestion is the wa=
y
> > > > to go for AD7194. (Although I didn't actually try it on hardware, s=
o
> > > > can't be 100% confident. But at least 90% confident :-p)
> > >
> > > You would have to define a channel number for aincom.  There is an ex=
plicit
> > > example in the datasheet of it being at 2.5V using a reference supply=
.
> > >
> > > I wonder what expectation here is.  Allways a reference regulator on =
that pin, or
> > > an actually varying input? Maybe in long term we want to support both
> > > options - so if aincom-supply is provided these are single ended with
> > > an offset, but if not they are differential channels between channel =
X and
> > > channel AINCOM.
> > >
> > > Note though that this mode is described a pseudo differential which n=
ormally
> > > means a fixed voltage on the negative.
> > >
> > > So gut feeling from me is treat them as single ended and add an
> > > aincom-supply + the offsets that result if that is provided in DT and
> > > voltage from it is non 0.
> >
> > Calling AINCOM a supply doesn't sound right to me since usually this
> > signal is coming somewhere external, i.e. you have a twisted pair
> > connected to AIN1 and AINCOM going to some signal source that may be
> > hot-pluggable and not known at compile time. As an example, if AINCOM
> > was modeled as a supply, then we would have to change the device tree
> > every time we changed the voltage offset on the signal generator while
> > we are testing using an evaluation board.
>
> We tend to stick away from designing features to support testing with
> devboards where external wiring is involved because anything could be
> wired up there. (Examples are things like shunt resistors - normally
> they are DT only) So sometimes it's a bit painful to work with such board=
s.
> The main focus has to be production devices or at least stable set ups
> where a fixed DT is sufficient.
>
> So I'm more interested in focusing on production device use cases.
> Do we have an information on how this is this used in those environments?
>

Point taken. I also checked with an apps engineer at ADI and it does
sound like AINCOM should be a supply.