Spam detection software, running on the system "lists.denx.de", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: Hi Philipp, å¨ 2017/9/14 4:40, Philipp Tomsich åé: >
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, David Wu wrote: > >> The ADC can support some channels
signal-ended some bits Successive >> Approximation >> Register (SAR) A/D Converter, like 6-channel and 10-bit. It converts >> the analog >> input signal into some bits binary digital codes. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Wu david.wu@rock-chips.com
Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com Please see below for requested changes. > >> --- >> drivers/adc/KconfigÂ
         |  9 ++ >> drivers/adc/Makefile         |  1 + >> drivers/adc/rockchip-saradc.c | 188 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 198 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/adc/rockchip-saradc.c
diff --git a/drivers/adc/Kconfig b/drivers/adc/Kconfig >> index e5335f7..830fe0f
100644 >> --- a/drivers/adc/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/adc/Kconfig >> @@ -20,6 +20,15 @@ config ADC_EXYNOS >> Â Â Â Â Â - 12-bit resolution >> Â Â Â Â Â - 600 KSPS of sample rate >> >> +config SARADC_ROCKCHIP >> +Â Â Â bool "Enable Rockchip SARADC driver" >> +Â Â Â help >> +Â Â Â Â Â This enables driver for Rockchip SARADC. >> +Â Â Â Â Â It provides: >> +Â Â Â Â Â - 2~6 analog input channels >> +Â Â Â Â Â - 1O-bit resolution >> +Â Â Â Â Â - 1MSPS of sample rate >> + >> config ADC_SANDBOX >> Â Â Â Â bool "Enable Sandbox ADC test driver" >> Â Â Â Â help >> diff --git a/drivers/adc/Makefile b/drivers/adc/Makefile
index cebf26d..4b5aa69 100644 >> --- a/drivers/adc/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/adc/Makefile @@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ >> obj-$(CONFIG_ADC) += adc-uclass.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_ADC_EXYNOS)
+= exynos-adc.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_ADC_SANDBOX) += sandbox.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_SARADC_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip-saradc.o > > Do you feel strongly about the "SARADC_ROCKCHIP" or would "ADC_ROCKCHIP" > be correct as well? I don't care either way, but this is the first > entry here that does not start with CONFIG_ADC_, so I am wondering... [...]
Content analysis details: (6.8 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.6 RCVD_IN_SBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL [211.157.147.132 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net [Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?58.22.7.114] 2.4 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5 RBL: Very bad reputation (-5) [211.157.147.132 listed in bl.mailspike.net] 0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is an abusable web server [58.22.7.114 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL Mailspike blacklisted