[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ceb4f367-b910-578a-24bc-7c222e2f0b0f@topic.nl>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 07:31:36 +0100
From: Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
CC: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@...htek.com>,
ChiaEn Wu <chiaen_wu@...htek.com>,
Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@...il.com>,
Ibrahim Tilki <Ibrahim.Tilki@...log.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Ramona Bolboaca <ramona.bolboaca@...log.com>,
William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] iio: adc: Add TI ADS1100 and ADS1000
Met vriendelijke groet / kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products B.V.
Materiaalweg 4, 5681 RJ Best
The Netherlands
T: +31 (0) 499 33 69 69
E: mike.looijmans@...icproducts.com
W: www.topic.nl
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
On 04-03-2023 18:57, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 07:31:51 +0100
> Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl> wrote:
>
>> The ADS1100 is a 16-bit ADC (at 8 samples per second).
>> The ADS1000 is similar, but has a fixed data rate.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>
> Hi Mike,
>
> A few minor things + one request for a test as trying to chase a possible
> ref count overflow around the runtime_pm was giving me a enough of a headache
> that it's easier to ask you just to poke it and see. If it doesn't fail as
> I expect I'll take a closer look!
Will do, but it may take a few days to get access to the hardware again.
I'll report on that later.
>> +static int ads1100_set_scale(struct ads1100_data *data, int val, int val2)
>> +{
>> + int microvolts;
>> + int gain;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + /* With Vdd between 2.7 and 5V, the scale is always below 1 */
>> + if (val)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + microvolts = regulator_get_voltage(data->reg_vdd);
>> + /* Calculate: gain = ((microvolts / 1000) / (val2 / 1000000)) >> 15 */
>> + gain = ((microvolts + BIT(14)) >> 15) * 1000 / val2;
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
>> + if (BIT(i) == gain) {
>> + ads1100_set_config_bits(data, ADS1100_PGA_MASK, i);
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> + }
> Andy's suggestion of something like..
> if (!gain)
> return -EINVAL;
> i = ffs(gain);
> if (i >= 4 || BIT(i) != gain)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> ads...
>
> Is perhaps nicer than the loop.
Yes, takes out a loop.
>
>> +static void ads1100_disable_continuous(void *data)
>> +{
>> + ads1100_set_config_bits(data, ADS1100_CFG_SC, ADS1100_SINGLESHOT);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int ads1100_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>> +{
>> + struct iio_dev *indio_dev;
>> + struct ads1100_data *data;
>> + struct device *dev = &client->dev;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + indio_dev = devm_iio_device_alloc(dev, sizeof(*data));
>> + if (!indio_dev)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>> + i2c_set_clientdata(client, indio_dev);
> You can avoid the slightly nasty mix of i2c_set_clientdata vs dev_get_drvdata()
> below by taking advantage of the fact you have a local dev pointer.
>
> dev_set_drvdata(dev, indio_dev);
> and no confusing mix is left. Of course it's doing the same thing but to my
> mind slightly nicer to use the same one.
Since I don't need indio_dev anywhere, I might as well say this directly:
dev_set_drvdata(dev, data);
(Only the pm_ routines use this)
> ...
>
--
Mike Looijmans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists