linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] iio: accel: Add support for Kionix/ROHM KX132 accelerometer

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

Message-ID: <ZBnch1tSKyR4fA7H@carbian>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2023 17:34:15 +0100
From:   Mehdi Djait <mehdi.djait.k@...il.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     mazziesaccount@...il.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] iio: accel: Add support for Kionix/ROHM KX132
 accelerometer

Hello Jonathan,

On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 04:22:07PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:48:37 +0100
> Mehdi Djait <mehdi.djait.k@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > Add support for the basic accelerometer features such as getting the
> > acceleration data via IIO. (raw reads, triggered buffer [data-ready] or
> > using the WMI IRQ).
> > 
> > Datasheet: https://kionixfs.azureedge.net/en/document/KX132-1211-Technical-Reference-Manual-Rev-5.0.pdf
> > Signed-off-by: Mehdi Djait <mehdi.djait.k@...il.com>
> 
> Nothing much specific to this patch, most changes will be as a result
> of bringing this inline with the changes suggested for patch 2.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> >  
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/kionix-kx022a.h b/drivers/iio/accel/kionix-kx022a.h
> > index 3bb40e9f5613..7e43bdb37156 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/accel/kionix-kx022a.h
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/kionix-kx022a.h
> > @@ -90,8 +90,61 @@
> >  #define KX022A_REG_SELF_TEST	0x60
> >  #define KX022A_MAX_REGISTER	0x60
> >  
> > +
> 
> Push these down into the c file.

Do you mean all REG and MASK defines ? 
Even kx022a defines them in the h file, or am I misunderstanding your
comment ?

> 
> > +#define KX132_REG_WHO		0x13
> > +#define KX132_ID		0x3d
> > +
> > +#define KX132_FIFO_LENGTH	86
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_CNTL2		0x1c
> > +#define KX132_REG_CNTL		0x1b
> > +#define KX132_MASK_RES		BIT(6)
> > +#define KX132_GSEL_2		0x0
> > +#define KX132_GSEL_4		BIT(3)
> > +#define KX132_GSEL_8		BIT(4)
> > +#define KX132_GSEL_16		GENMASK(4, 3)
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_INS2		0x17
> > +#define KX132_MASK_INS2_WMI	BIT(5)
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_XADP_L	0x02
> > +#define KX132_REG_XOUT_L	0x08
> > +#define KX132_REG_YOUT_L	0x0a
> > +#define KX132_REG_ZOUT_L	0x0c
> > +#define KX132_REG_COTR		0x12
> > +#define KX132_REG_TSCP		0x14
> > +#define KX132_REG_INT_REL	0x1a
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_ODCNTL	0x21
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_BTS_WUF_TH	0x4a
> > +#define KX132_REG_MAN_WAKE	0x4d
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_BUF_CNTL1	0x5e
> > +#define KX132_REG_BUF_CNTL2	0x5f
> > +#define KX132_REG_BUF_STATUS_1	0x60
> > +#define KX132_REG_BUF_STATUS_2	0x61
> > +#define KX132_MASK_BUF_SMP_LVL	GENMASK(9, 0)
> > +#define KX132_REG_BUF_CLEAR	0x62
> > +#define KX132_REG_BUF_READ	0x63
> > +#define KX132_ODR_SHIFT		3
> > +#define KX132_FIFO_MAX_WMI_TH	86
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_INC1		0x22
> > +#define KX132_REG_INC5		0x26
> > +#define KX132_REG_INC6		0x27
> > +#define KX132_IPOL_LOW		0
> > +#define KX132_IPOL_HIGH		KX_MASK_IPOL
> > +#define KX132_ITYP_PULSE	KX_MASK_ITYP
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_INC4		0x25
> > +
> > +#define KX132_REG_SELF_TEST	0x5d
> > +#define KX132_MAX_REGISTER	0x76
> > +
> >  enum kx022a_device_type {
> >  	KX022A,
> > +	KX132,
> As mentioned in previous review, I think this would be neater
> done by just exporting the chip_info structures directly rather than
> putting them in an array.

I gave the reason in a response to the previous review.

--
Kind Regards
Mehdi Djait