linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] iio: accel: kxcjk-1013: Add support for KX023-1025

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 13 May 2021 17:14:26 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To:     Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc:     Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Robert Yang <decatf@...il.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] iio: accel: kxcjk-1013: Add support for KX023-1025

On Tue, 11 May 2021 16:50:51 +0200
Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl> wrote:

> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 04:38:06PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > Hi Michał,
> > 
> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 04:28:47PM +0200, Michał Mirosław wrote:  
> > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:54:06AM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:  
> > > > KX023-1025 [1] is another accelerometer from Kionix that has lots
> > > > of additional functionality compared to KXCJK-1013. It combines the
> > > > motion interrupt functionality from KXCJK with the tap detection
> > > > from KXTF9, plus a lot more other functionality.  
> > > When I researched KXTF9 support it occurred to me that the -10xx part is
> > > duplicating the information in 'KXyyy' - it seems to be a project number
> > > or something. I would suggest to use just 'kx023' prefix for the code
> > > and DT but leave the full identification in the comments/description.  
> > There do seem to be two different KXTF9 from Kionix, a KXTF9-4100 [1]
> > and a KXTF9-2050 [2] with separate datasheets. Have you checked if there
> > is a meaningful difference between them?  
> 
> I haven't compared them thoroughly, but the versions seem to differ only
> in power consumption (maybe a different manufacturing process?). The
> register sets seem the same.

Differ in expected Vdd supply voltage. 3.3 vs 1.8V .  Looks like this has
knock on effects on things like self test values.  So I'd argue it's worth keeping
the distinction for device tree. 

We could do a double compatible

compatible = kionix,kx023-1024, konix,kx023;

but may be too late to do that now.

Jonathan


> 
> Best Regards
> Michał Mirosław