Re: [PATCH V3] iio: pressure: hp03: Add Hope RF HP03 sensor support

[Marek Vasut <marex-ynQEQJNshbs@public.gmane.org>]

On 04/18/2016 03:44 PM, jic23-tko9wxEg+fIOOJlXag/Snyp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org wrote:
> On 18.04.2016 14:26, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 04/16/2016 09:40 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> On 10/04/16 21:52, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> Add support for HopeRF pressure and temperature sensor.
>>>>
>>>> This device uses two fixed I2C addresses, one for storing
>>>> calibration coefficients and another for accessing the ADC.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex-ynQEQJNshbs@public.gmane.org>
>>>> Cc: Matt Ranostay <mranostay-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
>>>> Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>>> Sorry I didn't get to this earlier in the week.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately the resulting scales don't match the standard ABI for
>>> these
>>> two channel types.
>>
>> Ah, sorry for the inconvenience.
>>
>>> Otherwise, looks good. I've cc'd the devicetree list and maintainers.
>>> The binding is trivial I think, but always good to give people a
>>> opportunity to comment.
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>> ---
>>>> V2: - Expand the binding document with more details on the XCLR pin
>>>>     - Switch from IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED to RAW + SCALE
>>>>     - Add failpath into hp03_update_temp_pressure() for the case
>>>>       when ADC readout fails. This correctly sets the XCLR pin back
>>>>       to LO now.
>>>>     - Add comment explaining the need for allocation of child device
>>>>       in hp03_probe().
>>>> V3: - Fix indent in the DT binding documentation
>>>>     - Report raw pressure and temperature unmodified
>>> Good
>>>>     - Report pressure scale to be 1 , since pressure is in Pa
>>> Standard units for pressure (see Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio
>>> are KPa so it wants to report 0.001)
>>
>> OK, got it.
>>
>>>>     - Report temperature scale to be 0.01 , since temp is in 0.01C
>>>> steps
>>> Unfortunately the documented base unit for temp (originally from
>>> hwmon before
>>> we started going for SI units every time) are milli Celcius.  Thus
>>> the value
>>> reported * scale should end up in milli degrees Celcius. Hence if it
>>> is in 0.01
>>> steps the scale should be 0.1
>>
>> Shouldn't this be 10 ? The value is in 0.01C steps , so the value has to
>> be multiplied by 10 to convert it into mC units.
> err. yes I'm clearly wrong :)

Thanks for confirming :) V4 is coming.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut