[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240716180850.7c6089f2@jic23-huawei>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 18:08:50 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: Adam Rizkalla <ajarizzo@...il.com>
Cc: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@...il.com>, lars@...afoo.de,
petre.rodan@...dimension.ro, mazziesaccount@...il.com, ak@...klinger.de,
ang.iglesiasg@...il.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org, tgamblin@...libre.com,
phil@...pberrypi.com, 579lpy@...il.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
semen.protsenko@...aro.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] iio: pressure: bmp280: Generalize read_*()
functions
> >
> > static const int bmp580_odr_table[][2] = {
> > @@ -1830,6 +1848,9 @@ static int bmp580_chip_config(struct bmp280_data *data)
> >
> > static const int bmp580_oversampling_avail[] = { 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 };
> > static const u8 bmp580_chip_ids[] = { BMP580_CHIP_ID, BMP580_CHIP_ID_ALT };
> > +/* Instead of { 1000, 16 } we do this, to avoid overflow issues */
> > +static const int bmp580_temp_coeffs[] = { 125, 13 };
>
> I'm not really sure what we gain here from using 125/13 instead of
> 250/14...but I don't think it hurts either.
>
> I don't have a way to test this with the latest kernel release
> currently, but lgtm.
>
> Acked-by: Adam Rizkalla <ajarizzo@...il.com>
Series applied. Thanks
Jonathan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists