| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 12:07:04 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>,
Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>
Cc: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] iio: cros_ec_light_prox: add ChromeOS EC Light and
Proximity Sensors
On 23/01/17 18:18, Gwendal Grignou wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Enric Balletbo Serra
> <eballetbo@...il.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>> Thanks for the review, I am preparing v3. Some answers to your questions below.
>>
>> 2017-01-14 14:06 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>:
>>> On 11/01/17 15:51, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>>> From: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>
>>>>
>>>> Handle Light and Proximity sensors presented by the ChromeOS EC Sensor hub.
>>>> Creates an IIO device for each functions.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> Looks like you were cleaning up the interface and left a few bits behind...
>>> Please tidy those up and repost.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/iio/common/cros_ec_sensors/Kconfig | 8 +
>>>> drivers/iio/common/cros_ec_sensors/Makefile | 1 +
>>>> .../common/cros_ec_sensors/cros_ec_light_prox.c | 287 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>> I missed this before. I'd actually like to have this in the proximity
>>> directory rather than here. The reason is to keep the drivers grouped
>>> by function is preferred to grouping by what implements them.
>>
>> Ok, I'll move this.
>>
>>>> 3 files changed, 296 insertions(+)
>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/iio/common/cros_ec_sensors/cros_ec_light_prox.c
> ...
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (mask) {
>>>> + case IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED:
>>>> + if (cros_ec_sensors_read_cmd(indio_dev, 1 << idx,
>>>> + (s16 *)&data) < 0) {
>>>> + ret = -EIO;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (chan->type) {
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * The data coming from the sensor is pre-processed, represents
>>>> + * the ambient light illuminance reading expressed in lux.
>>>> + */
>>>> + case IIO_LIGHT:
>>>> + *val = data;
>>>> + ret = IIO_VAL_INT;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * The data coming from the sensor is pre-processed, represents
>>>> + * the distance reading expressed in cm. Convert to m.
>>>> + */
>>>> + case IIO_PROXIMITY:
>>> Out of curiousity, what kind of proximity sensor is this? I'm suprised it
>>> has any real world units as I'd assumed we were dealing with a light
>>> intensity based sensor and reflection.
>>
>> The CrosEC acts as a sensor hub, it can have different sensors
>> attached that differs betweens Chromebooks models. The sensor hub
>> captures the data from sensors and does some conversion and then
>> exposes the result through it's interface. E.g For light and proximity
>> sensors it can have attached a si144x [1] Proximity/Ambient Light
>> Sensor Modules.
>>
>> [1] http://www.silabs.com/products/sensors/infraredsensors/Pages/Si114x.aspx
>>
> The embedded controller (EC) does the conversion from the reflection.
> SI114x has 2 mode, light sensor and proximity sensor: in the later
> case, ambient light is ignored and reflection of a led is measured.
> The transformation from reflection to distance is an approximation.
Very approximate given the reflective material is unknown. Still that's why
they call them proximity sensors rather than distance sensors ;)
>
>>>> + *val = 0;
>>>> + *val2 = data * 10000;
>>>> + ret = IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
> ...
>>>> + state->core.loc = state->core.resp->info.location;
>>>> + channel = state->channels;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Common part */
>>>> + channel->info_mask_separate =
>>>> +// BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) |
>>> What's this doing here?
>>
>> Sorry, removed.
>>
>>>> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED) |
>>>> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_CALIBBIAS) |
>>>> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_CALIBSCALE);
>>>> + channel->info_mask_shared_by_all =
>>>> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE) |
>>> Providing processed and 'scale' is unusual... Even more interesting
>>> is you don't seem to provide it or indeed the next two...
> I see your point.
> Data from the sensor is massaged by the EC with input from calibbias
> and calibscale. Given this is not a heavy processing, it would be more
> logical to expose the illimunance/proximity as IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW
> instead of IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED.
>
> An earlier version of this driver was returning 1 to
> IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE, that's why IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE was present. We
> may bring it back if a sensor needs it.
Yes. That makes sense.
>>>
>>> Please check out this whole area.
>>
>> Yes, I get rid of scale from here.
>>
>>>> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SAMP_FREQ) |
>>>> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_FREQUENCY);
>>
>> These are from cros_ec_sensors_core
>>
>>>> + channel->scan_type.realbits = CROS_EC_SENSOR_BITS;
>>>> + channel->scan_type.storagebits = CROS_EC_SENSOR_BITS;
>>>> + channel->scan_type.shift = 0;
> ...
>>>> +
>>>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ChromeOS EC light/proximity sensors driver");
>>>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm preparing v3, thanks,
>> Enric
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists