Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-105610-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: <20240227005606.1107203-1-kcfeng0@nuvoton.com> <20240227005606.1107203-4-kcfeng0@nuvoton.com>
 <a90ed00c-f836-4fb6-8191-9974937e3eb7@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
 <CALz278Zgfgob573vgWz4PgC7vb=i8xt3kC1hSjo_cQi00B0XAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <cd63bec7-01c6-466e-b772-3a3d3d90a7d5@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
 <37e11daa-c24e-45b2-a22d-769693fd2038@roeck-us.net> <a93e2971-cafc-480b-b439-f42ed0838660@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
In-Reply-To: <a93e2971-cafc-480b-b439-f42ed0838660@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
From: Ban Feng <baneric926@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 09:02:42 +0800
Message-ID: <CALz278b7BeGoYunqh1Rs91N81sEnU_RDox3urqTb9CFX0ic5_g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] hwmon: Driver for Nuvoton NCT7363Y
To: Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, jdelvare@suse.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, 
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, 
	linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, kcfeng0@nuvoton.com, 
	kwliu@nuvoton.com, openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, DELPHINE_CHIU@wiwynn.com, 
	naresh.solanki@9elements.com, billy_tsai@aspeedtech.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

HI Guenter and Zev,

If there's no concern about supporting nct7362 in nct7363 driver,
I'll add it to the of_device_id and i2c_device_id table in v5.

Thanks,
Ban

On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 8:21=E2=80=AFAM Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net> w=
rote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 04:58:12PM PDT, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >On 3/12/24 16:18, Zev Weiss wrote:
> >>On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 11:35:31PM PST, Ban Feng wrote:
> >>>Hi Zev,
> >>>
> >>>On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 4:19=E2=80=AFPM Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.ne=
t> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 04:56:06PM PST, baneric926@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>From: Ban Feng <kcfeng0@nuvoton.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>NCT7363Y is an I2C based hardware monitoring chip from Nuvoton.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Signed-off-by: Ban Feng <kcfeng0@nuvoton.com>
> >>>>>---
> >>
> >><snip>
> >>
> >>>>>+
> >>>>>+static const struct of_device_id nct7363_of_match[] =3D {
> >>>>>+      { .compatible =3D "nuvoton,nct7363" },
> >>>>
> >>>>As far as I can see from the code in this driver, it looks like this
> >>>>driver should also be compatible with the nct7362; shall we add the I=
D
> >>>>table entry for it now?  (Though I only have a datasheet for the
> >>>>nct7362, not the nct7363, so I don't know exactly how they differ.)
> >>>
> >>>As far as I know, the difference between these two ICs is 0x2A~0x2C
> >>>Fading LED for 7362, and 0x2A Watchdog Timer for 7363.
> >>>In my v1 patch, I indeed add the nct7362 to the ID table, however,
> >>>this makes it more complicated and our datasheet isn't public yet.
> >>>I think maybe supporting more chips will be done in the future, but no=
t now.
> >>>
> >>
> >>If the only differences are in features the driver doesn't utilize, I'm=
 not clear on how it adds any complexity.  As far as I'm aware, neither dat=
asheet is public (NCT7363 nor NCT7362), so if we're going to have a public =
driver for one, why not also do so for the other?  It's a single additional=
 line -- and furthermore, having made that change and tested it out, I can =
report that the driver seems to work just fine on NCT7362 hardware as well.
> >>
> >
> >"if we're going to have a public driver for one, why not also do so for =
the other"
> >
> >If you are trying to say that there should be two separate drivers, sorr=
y, that
> >would be absolutely unacceptable.
> >
>
> Sorry if that was unclear -- it was very much *not* my intent to suggest
> adding a separate driver, merely that we make the nct7363 driver also
> support the nct7362.
>
>
> Zev
>