Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iio: tsl2772: add support for Avago APDS9900/9901 ALS/Proximity sensor

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2026 16:46:25 +0300
Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com> wrote:

> нд, 19 квіт. 2026 р. о 16:38 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> пише:
> >
> > On Sun, 19 Apr 2026 11:31:23 +0300
> > Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  
> > > The Avago APDS990x has the same register set as the TAOS/AMS TSL2772 so  
> >
> > A Sashiko review comment makes me wonder about one thing below if the
> > register set does match.  Maybe it's a bit more subtle than this
> > patch description suggests?
> >  
> > > just add the correct bindings and the appropriate LUX table derived from
> > > the values in the datasheet. Driver was tested on the LG Optimus Vu P895.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c b/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c
> > > index c8f15ba95267..8dab34bf00ca 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c
> > > @@ -127,6 +127,7 @@ enum {
> > >       tmd2672,
> > >       tsl2772,
> > >       tmd2772,
> > > +     apds990x,
> > >       apds9930,
> > >  };
> > >
> > > @@ -221,6 +222,12 @@ static const struct tsl2772_lux tmd2x72_lux_table[TSL2772_DEF_LUX_TABLE_SZ] = {
> > >       {     0,      0 },
> > >  };
> > >
> > > +static const struct tsl2772_lux apds990x_lux_table[TSL2772_DEF_LUX_TABLE_SZ] = {
> > > +     { 52000,  115960 },
> > > +     { 36400,   73840 },
> > > +     {     0,       0 },
> > > +};
> > > +
> > >  static const struct tsl2772_lux apds9930_lux_table[TSL2772_DEF_LUX_TABLE_SZ] = {
> > >       { 52000,  96824 },
> > >       { 38792,  67132 },
> > > @@ -238,6 +245,7 @@ static const struct tsl2772_lux *tsl2772_default_lux_table_group[] = {
> > >       [tmd2672] = tmd2x72_lux_table,
> > >       [tsl2772] = tsl2x72_lux_table,
> > >       [tmd2772] = tmd2x72_lux_table,
> > > +     [apds990x] = apds990x_lux_table,
> > >       [apds9930] = apds9930_lux_table,
> > >  };
> > >
> > > @@ -289,6 +297,7 @@ static const int tsl2772_int_time_avail[][6] = {
> > >       [tmd2672] = { 0, 2730, 0, 2730, 0, 699000 },
> > >       [tsl2772] = { 0, 2730, 0, 2730, 0, 699000 },
> > >       [tmd2772] = { 0, 2730, 0, 2730, 0, 699000 },
> > > +     [apds990x] = { 0, 2720, 0, 2720, 0, 696000 },
> > >       [apds9930] = { 0, 2730, 0, 2730, 0, 699000 },
> > >  };
> > >
> > > @@ -316,6 +325,7 @@ static const u8 device_channel_config[] = {
> > >       [tmd2672] = PRX2,
> > >       [tsl2772] = ALSPRX2,
> > >       [tmd2772] = ALSPRX2,
> > > +     [apds990x] = ALSPRX,  
> >
> > This is different from tsl2772?  
> 
> yes, lux table is different and made according to datasheet,
> tsl2772_int_time_avail differs, ALSPRX configuration assumes that
> proximity sensor needs no calibration which is true for apds9900/1
> while tsl2772 needs calibration, device ID is different 0x20/0x29 for
> apds and 0x30 for tsl2772

All makes sense but that means the patch description needs to be
more precise about what elements are compatible, or use vaguer wording
like 'similar to'.

Jonathan

> 
> >  
> > >       [apds9930] = ALSPRX2,
> > >  };  
> >  
>