From: Justin Weiss <justin@justinweiss.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: "Alex Lanzano" <lanzano.alex@gmail.com>,
"Lars-Peter Clausen" <lars@metafoo.de>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Derek J . Clark" <derekjohn.clark@gmail.com>,
"Philip Müller" <philm@manjaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] iio: imu: bmi270: Add support for BMI260
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 13:52:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sesrak8w.fsf@justinweiss.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241019124013.0575e05b@jic23-huawei> (Jonathan Cameron's message of "Sat, 19 Oct 2024 12:40:13 +0100")
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> writes:
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 16:36:10 -0700
> Justin Weiss <justin@justinweiss.com> wrote:
>
>> Adds support for the Bosch BMI260 6-axis IMU to the Bosch BMI270
>> driver. Setup and operation is nearly identical to the Bosch BMI270,
>> but has a different chip ID and requires different firmware.
>>
>> Firmware is requested and loaded from userspace.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Justin Weiss <justin@justinweiss.com>
> Trivial comments inline and a discussion on whether my earlier
> don't use an array comment makes sense in this particular case.
>
> Jonathan
>
>> ---
>> drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270.h | 1 +
>> drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_core.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_i2c.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>> drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_spi.c | 8 ++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270.h b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270.h
>> index 2e8d85a4e419..51e374fd4290 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270.h
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270.h
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ struct bmi270_data {
>> };
>>
>> enum bmi270_device_type {
>> + BMI260,
>> BMI270,
>> };
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_core.c
>> index 799df78ec862..b30201dc4e22 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi270/bmi270_core.c
>> @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
>> #include "bmi270.h"
>>
>> #define BMI270_CHIP_ID_REG 0x00
>> +#define BMI160_CHIP_ID_VAL 0xD1
>
> This one looks like a cut and paste error.
No, this was intentional -- I added the BMI160 chip ID here so it could
be checked later to avoid conflicting with the existing bmi160 driver. I
could add newlines before and after this group of _ID_VAL #defines if it
makes it clearer.
>> +#define BMI260_CHIP_ID_VAL 0x27
>> #define BMI270_CHIP_ID_VAL 0x24
>> #define BMI270_CHIP_ID_MSK GENMASK(7, 0)
>>
>> @@ -55,6 +57,7 @@
>> #define BMI270_PWR_CTRL_ACCEL_EN_MSK BIT(2)
>> #define BMI270_PWR_CTRL_TEMP_EN_MSK BIT(3)
>>
>> +#define BMI260_INIT_DATA_FILE "bmi260-init-data.fw"
>> #define BMI270_INIT_DATA_FILE "bmi270-init-data.fw"
>>
>> enum bmi270_scan {
>> @@ -67,6 +70,11 @@ enum bmi270_scan {
>> };
>>
>> const struct bmi270_chip_info bmi270_chip_info[] = {
>> + [BMI260] = {
>> + .name = "bmi260",
>> + .chip_id = BMI260_CHIP_ID_VAL,
>> + .fw_name = BMI260_INIT_DATA_FILE,
>> + },
>> [BMI270] = {
>> .name = "bmi270",
>> .chip_id = BMI270_CHIP_ID_VAL,
>> @@ -163,8 +171,21 @@ static int bmi270_validate_chip_id(struct bmi270_data *bmi270_device)
>> if (ret)
>> return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to read chip id");
>>
>> - if (chip_id != BMI270_CHIP_ID_VAL)
>> - dev_info(dev, "Unknown chip id 0x%x", chip_id);
>> + /*
>> + * Some manufacturers use "BMI0160" for both the BMI160 and
>> + * BMI260. If the device is actually a BMI160, the bmi160
>> + * driver should handle it and this driver should not.
>> + */
>> + if (chip_id == BMI160_CHIP_ID_VAL)
>> + return -ENODEV;
This is where that BMI160 chip ID is checked.
>> +
>> + if (chip_id != bmi270_device->chip_info->chip_id)
>> + dev_info(dev, "Unexpected chip id 0x%x", chip_id);
>> +
>> + if (chip_id == BMI260_CHIP_ID_VAL)
>
> Ah. My argument on separate IDs means you'd have to do it this way whereas
> I was thinking maybe a loop would be a better idea. Ah well if we
> get a lot of supported chips, then we can rethink how to handle this.
> For now what you have here is fine and should deal with lack of appropriate
> ACPI ID mess.
I like the idea of separate structures, so I'll keep the if / else
here. I think it would be straightforward to change later without
conflicts if there are more supported chips.
I will change this to check against bmi260_chip_info.chip_id,
etc. instead of the constants, to make sure they stay consistent.
Justin
>> + bmi270_device->chip_info = &bmi270_chip_info[BMI260];
>> + else if (chip_id == BMI270_CHIP_ID_VAL)
>> + bmi270_device->chip_info = &bmi270_chip_info[BMI270];
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-19 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-18 23:36 [PATCH v2 0/6] Add i2c driver for Bosch BMI260 IMU Justin Weiss
2024-10-18 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] iio: imu: bmi270: Use INFO_SAMP_FREQ instead of INFO_FREQUENCY Justin Weiss
2024-10-19 11:30 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-19 20:48 ` Justin Weiss
2024-10-18 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] iio: imu: bmi270: Provide chip info as configuration structure Justin Weiss
2024-10-19 11:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-19 20:49 ` Justin Weiss
2024-10-18 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] dt-bindings: iio: imu: Add Bosch BMI260 Justin Weiss
2024-10-19 11:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-19 20:49 ` Justin Weiss
2024-10-18 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] iio: imu: bmi270: Add support for BMI260 Justin Weiss
2024-10-19 11:40 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-19 20:52 ` Justin Weiss [this message]
2024-10-20 11:00 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-18 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] iio: imu: bmi270: Add triggered buffer for Bosch BMI270 IMU Justin Weiss
2024-10-19 11:41 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-19 20:52 ` Justin Weiss
2024-10-18 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] iio: imu: bmi270: Add scale and sampling frequency to " Justin Weiss
2024-10-19 11:44 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-10-19 20:52 ` Justin Weiss
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87sesrak8w.fsf@justinweiss.com \
--to=justin@justinweiss.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=derekjohn.clark@gmail.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=lanzano.alex@gmail.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=philm@manjaro.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).