Devicetree
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt1@gmail.com>
To: Jorijn van der Graaf <jorijnvdgraaf@catcrafts.net>
Cc: "Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@kernel.org>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
	"David Lechner" <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
	"Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
	"Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, "Kees Cook" <kees@kernel.org>,
	"Gustavo A . R . Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Luca Weiss" <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] iio: light: stk3310: support the Sensortek STK36C61
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2026 01:18:18 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <apEMCqQXyj1tAMoP@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260826175409.326131-6-jorijnvdgraaf@catcrafts.net>

Hello Jorijn, few questions inline.

On 08/26, Jorijn van der Graaf wrote:
> The Sensortek STK36C61 is a 3-in-1 ambient light / proximity / RGB
> colour sensor (chip ID 0x95) found in the Fairphone 6. Its register
> interface is compatible with the feature set this driver uses: the
> STATE/FLAG bit layout, the data and threshold registers and the gain
> and integration-time fields, verified on that device (the ALS and
> proximity readings scale with their gain and integration-time fields,
> thresholds written through the event interface read back from the
> chip, and the FLAG near/far bit crosses with them). Add its chip ID to
> the known-ID list and the device table entries.
> 
...
> 
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-fable-5
> Signed-off-by: Jorijn van der Graaf <jorijnvdgraaf@catcrafts.net>
> ---
...
> @@ -417,10 +459,10 @@ static int stk3310_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  		mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
>  		return IIO_VAL_INT;
>  	case IIO_CHAN_INFO_INT_TIME:
> -		if (chan->type == IIO_LIGHT)
> -			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_als_it, &index);
> -		else
> +		if (chan->type == IIO_PROXIMITY)
>  			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_ps_it, &index);
> +		else
> +			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_als_it, &index);
The above seems unnecessary. Why changing the comparison from IIO_LIGHT to IIO_PROXIMITY?
After the proposed update we would have the integration time for both light and
intensity channels being read from the same register field?

>  		if (ret < 0)
>  			return ret;
>  
> @@ -428,10 +470,12 @@ static int stk3310_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  		*val2 = stk3310_it_table[index][1];
>  		return IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
>  	case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE:
> -		if (chan->type == IIO_LIGHT)
> -			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_als_gain, &index);
> -		else
> +		if (chan->type == IIO_PROXIMITY)
>  			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_ps_gain, &index);
> +		else if (chan->channel2 == IIO_MOD_LIGHT_CLEAR)
> +			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_clear_gain, &index);
> +		else
> +			ret = regmap_field_read(data->reg_als_gain, &index);
Similar question here. What do we accomplish by comparing to proximity instead
of light? Is the gain info the same for light and intensity red/green/blue channels?

>  		if (ret < 0)
>  			return ret;
>  
> @@ -451,7 +495,8 @@ static int stk3310_write_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  	int index;
>  	struct stk3310_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>  
> -	if (chan->type != IIO_LIGHT && chan->type != IIO_PROXIMITY)
> +	if (chan->type != IIO_LIGHT && chan->type != IIO_PROXIMITY &&
> +	    chan->type != IIO_INTENSITY)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	switch (mask) {
> @@ -462,10 +507,10 @@ static int stk3310_write_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  		if (index < 0)
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> -		if (chan->type == IIO_LIGHT)
> -			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_als_it, index);
> -		else
> +		if (chan->type == IIO_PROXIMITY)
>  			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_ps_it, index);
> +		else
> +			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_als_it, index);
Same pattern, same questions.

>  		if (ret < 0)
>  			dev_err(&data->client->dev,
>  				"sensor configuration failed\n");
> @@ -479,10 +524,12 @@ static int stk3310_write_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  		if (index < 0)
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> -		if (chan->type == IIO_LIGHT)
> -			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_als_gain, index);
> -		else
> +		if (chan->type == IIO_PROXIMITY)
>  			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_ps_gain, index);
> +		else if (chan->channel2 == IIO_MOD_LIGHT_CLEAR)
> +			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_clear_gain, index);
> +		else
> +			ret = regmap_field_write(data->reg_als_gain, index);
And here.

>  		if (ret < 0)
>  			dev_err(&data->client->dev,
>  				"sensor configuration failed\n");

With best regards,
Marcelo

      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-28  4:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-26 17:54 [PATCH v2 0/5] iio: light: stk3310: per-chip match data and STK36C61 support Jorijn van der Graaf
2026-08-26 17:54 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] iio: light: stk3310: lower-case the i2c device ID names Jorijn van der Graaf
2026-08-26 18:03   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-27  6:45   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-26 17:54 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] dt-bindings: iio: light: stk33xx: document the Sensortek STK36C61 Jorijn van der Graaf
2026-08-26 17:54 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] iio: light: stk3310: move the data registers into the channel address Jorijn van der Graaf
2026-08-26 18:07   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-27  6:47   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-26 17:54 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] iio: light: stk3310: add per-chip match data Jorijn van der Graaf
2026-08-26 18:03   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-27  7:47   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-26 17:54 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] iio: light: stk3310: support the Sensortek STK36C61 Jorijn van der Graaf
2026-08-27  7:53   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-28  4:18   ` Marcelo Schmitt [this message]

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=apEMCqQXyj1tAMoP@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64 \
    --to=marcelo.schmitt1@gmail.com \
    --cc=andy@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
    --cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=jorijnvdgraaf@catcrafts.net \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luca.weiss@fairphone.com \
    --cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
    --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