[v5] dt-bindings: iio: adc: ad7923: adjust documentation

  - The ad7927 is fully compatible with ad7928 driver, add
documentation for device.
- ad7923 and ad7924 are treated the same in the driver, show
the relationship in the documentation.

Suggested-by: Lukasz Zemla <Lukasz.Zemla@woodward.com>
Signed-off-by: Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@emlix.com>
---
 .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
  

On 22/11/2022 17:14, Edmund Berenson wrote:
> - The ad7927 is fully compatible with ad7928 driver, add
> documentation for device.
> - ad7923 and ad7924 are treated the same in the driver, show
> the relationship in the documentation.
> 
> Suggested-by: Lukasz Zemla <Lukasz.Zemla@woodward.com>
> Signed-off-by: Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@emlix.com>
> ---
>  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>

1. This is a v5, what are the changes?

2.
This is a friendly reminder during the review process.

It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.

If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new
versions. However, there's no need to repost patches *only* to add the
tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for acks received on the
version they apply.

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.17/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L540

If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.



> ---
>  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 


Best regards,
Krzysztof
  

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:42:40AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/11/2022 17:14, Edmund Berenson wrote:
> > - The ad7927 is fully compatible with ad7928 driver, add
> > documentation for device.
> > - ad7923 and ad7924 are treated the same in the driver, show
> > the relationship in the documentation.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Lukasz Zemla <Lukasz.Zemla@woodward.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@emlix.com>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> 1. This is a v5, what are the changes?
> 
The original idea was adding the compatible string into driver itself,
then it was suggested that I have a fallback compatible to 7928 as the
hardware versions are treated the same in the driver. After that it was
suggested to add deprecated flag to standalone compatibility, but doing
so I didn't want to add compatibility on driver side just to mark it
deprecated in the documentation, so I dropped driver side changes.
Finally I had some issues getting the documentation syntax into an
acceptable form, mainly const vs enum listing of compatibility stings.

> 2.
> This is a friendly reminder during the review process.
> 
> It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.
> 
> If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
> Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new
> versions. However, there's no need to repost patches *only* to add the
> tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for acks received on the
> version they apply.
> 
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.17/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L540
> 
> If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
I did assume adding the tags was done by maintainer, I didn't knew I was
supposed to add it myself when resubmitting the patch. My apologies, I
will add the tags if I run in this situation in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
  

On 23/11/2022 12:32, Edmund Berenson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:42:40AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 22/11/2022 17:14, Edmund Berenson wrote:
>>> - The ad7927 is fully compatible with ad7928 driver, add
>>> documentation for device.
>>> - ad7923 and ad7924 are treated the same in the driver, show
>>> the relationship in the documentation.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Lukasz Zemla <Lukasz.Zemla@woodward.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@emlix.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
>>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> 1. This is a v5, what are the changes?
>>
> The original idea was adding the compatible string into driver itself,
> then it was suggested that I have a fallback compatible to 7928 as the
> hardware versions are treated the same in the driver. After that it was
> suggested to add deprecated flag to standalone compatibility, but doing
> so I didn't want to add compatibility on driver side just to mark it
> deprecated in the documentation, so I dropped driver side changes.
> Finally I had some issues getting the documentation syntax into an
> acceptable form, mainly const vs enum listing of compatibility stings.

That's a bit too long for a changelog. Keep it short but still
descriptive. Anyway - this must be in the changelog place, so after ---


Best regards,
Krzysztof
  

On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 14:01:30 +0100
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 23/11/2022 12:32, Edmund Berenson wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:42:40AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:  
> >> On 22/11/2022 17:14, Edmund Berenson wrote:  
> >>> - The ad7927 is fully compatible with ad7928 driver, add
> >>> documentation for device.
> >>> - ad7923 and ad7924 are treated the same in the driver, show
> >>> the relationship in the documentation.
> >>>
> >>> Suggested-by: Lukasz Zemla <Lukasz.Zemla@woodward.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Edmund Berenson <edmund.berenson@emlix.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  .../bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad7923.yaml          | 26 ++++++++++++-------
> >>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>>  
> >>
> >> 1. This is a v5, what are the changes?
> >>  
> > The original idea was adding the compatible string into driver itself,
> > then it was suggested that I have a fallback compatible to 7928 as the
> > hardware versions are treated the same in the driver. After that it was
> > suggested to add deprecated flag to standalone compatibility, but doing
> > so I didn't want to add compatibility on driver side just to mark it
> > deprecated in the documentation, so I dropped driver side changes.
> > Finally I had some issues getting the documentation syntax into an
> > acceptable form, mainly const vs enum listing of compatibility stings.  
> 
> That's a bit too long for a changelog. Keep it short but still
> descriptive. Anyway - this must be in the changelog place, so after ---
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

Given it won't get picked up by git anyway and all the info is in this thread
(plus we are right at end of the cycle and I want to pick this up).

Applied with Krzysztof's tag from v4.

Thanks,

Jonathan