[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfU26QZ7Z1ApzRcFPudgsQc7zWF5g0kwn7Jzk1htXaWng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 12:42:00 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] iio: pressure: dps310: Refactor startup procedure
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 4:42 PM Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 8/12/22 17:03, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:12 AM Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
...
> >> + rc = regmap_write(data->regmap, 0x0e, 0xA5);
> >> + if (rc)
> >> + return rc;
> >> +
> >> + rc = regmap_write(data->regmap, 0x0f, 0x96);
> >> + if (rc)
> >> + return rc;
> > This code already exists, but still want to ask, is it really
> > byte-registers here and not be16/le16 one? In such a case perhaps bulk
> > write can be used to reflect it better?
>
> The temperature and pressure regs are 24 bits big endian, and all the
> rest are 8 bits. I think the existing approach is best.
It doesn't look like you got what I was meaning... Or I misunderstood
what you said.
The code above writes two byte values to two sequential registers
which make me think that they are 16-bit registers at offset 0x0e.
...
> >> + rc = regmap_write(data->regmap, 0x0e, 0x00);
> >> + if (rc)
> >> + return rc;
> >> +
> >> + return regmap_write(data->regmap, 0x0f, 0x00);
Ditto.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists