linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 19/19] iio: chemical: bme680: Refactorize reading functions

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]

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 12:12:34 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@...il.com>
Cc: dpfrey@...il.com, himanshujha199640@...il.com, lars@...afoo.de,
 linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 mike.looijmans@...ic.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/19] iio: chemical: bme680: Refactorize reading
 functions

On Thu,  6 Jun 2024 23:23:13 +0200
Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@...il.com> wrote:

> The reading of the pressure and humidity value, requires an update
> of the t_fine variable which happens by reading the temperature
> value.
> 
> So the bme680_read_{press/humid}() functions of the above sensors
> are internally calling the equivalent bme680_read_temp() function
> in order to update the t_fine value. By just looking at the code
> this relation is a bit hidden and is not easy to understand why
> those channels are not independent.
> 
> This commit tries to clear these thing a bit by splitting the
> bme680_{read/compensate}_{temp/press/humid}() to the following:
> 
> i. bme680_read_{temp/press/humid}_adc(): read the raw value from
> the sensor.
> 
> ii. bme680_calc_t_fine(): calculate the t_fine variable.
> 
> iii. bme680_get_t_fine(): get the t_fine variable.
> 
> iv. bme680_compensate_{temp/press/humid}(): compensate the adc
> values and return the calculated value.
> 
> v. bme680_read_{temp/press/humid}(): combine calls of the
> aforementioned functions to return the requested value.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@...il.com>

LGTM. All the other patches I didn't comment on are fine.
5 can wait for the non fix part of the series as it's just a typo.
7-14 look fine but probably have to wait for 1-4 and (v3 of) 6
to get into the upstream of iio.git.

16,18,19 all look good.

Note given you have two series that are dependent on fixes
I might take v3 of patch 6 then send another fixes pull request
before I rebase the main togreg branch on char-next (once it
has those fixes). 

Getting complicated this cycle as a lot in flight!

Thanks,

Jonathan