Linux Documentation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Jinseob Kim <kimjinseob88@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	"David Lechner" <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
	"Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
	"Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Shuah Khan" <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v5 3/6] iio: osf: add protocol decoding
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:43:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260622174309.35904c86@jic23-huawei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260616072242.3942-4-kimjinseob88@gmail.com>

On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:22:39 +0900
Jinseob Kim <kimjinseob88@gmail.com> wrote:

> Add helpers for validating and decoding Open Sensor Fusion frames and the
> message payloads used by the initial receive path.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jinseob Kim <kimjinseob88@gmail.com>
A few things inline.

> ---
>  drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.c | 249 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.h |  97 ++++++++
>  2 files changed, 346 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.c
>  create mode 100644 drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.h
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.c b/drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..5bee545f3
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/iio/opensensorfusion/osf_protocol.c

> +int osf_protocol_decode_frame(const u8 *buf, size_t len,
> +			      struct osf_frame *frame, size_t *frame_len)
> +{
> +	u32 expected_crc;
> +	u32 actual_crc;
> +	u32 payload_len;
> +	size_t total_len;
> +	u8 major;
> +
> +	if (!buf || !frame || !frame_len)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (len < OSF_FRAME_MIN_LEN)
> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
> +
> +	if (get_unaligned_le32(buf) != OSF_FRAME_MAGIC)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	major = buf[4];
> +	if (major != OSF_PROTOCOL_MAJOR)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (get_unaligned_le16(buf + 6) != OSF_FRAME_HEADER_LEN)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	payload_len = get_unaligned_le32(buf + 10);
> +	if (payload_len > len - OSF_FRAME_MIN_LEN)
> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
> +
> +	if (get_unaligned_le32(buf + 34))
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	total_len = OSF_FRAME_HEADER_LEN + payload_len + OSF_FRAME_CRC_LEN;
> +	expected_crc = osf_crc32_ieee(buf, OSF_FRAME_HEADER_LEN + payload_len);
> +	actual_crc = get_unaligned_le32(buf + OSF_FRAME_HEADER_LEN + payload_len);
> +
> +	if (actual_crc != expected_crc)
> +		return -EBADMSG;
> +
> +	frame->protocol_minor = buf[5];
> +	frame->message_type = get_unaligned_le16(buf + 8);
> +	frame->payload_len = payload_len;
> +	frame->sequence = get_unaligned_le64(buf + 14);
> +	frame->timestamp_us = get_unaligned_le64(buf + 22);
> +	frame->flags = get_unaligned_le32(buf + 30);
> +	frame->payload = buf + OSF_FRAME_HEADER_LEN;
> +	frame->crc = actual_crc;

Same as below wrt to to using designated initializers for these
structure fills

> +	*frame_len = total_len;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int osf_protocol_decode_sensor_sample(const struct osf_frame *frame,
> +				      struct osf_sensor_sample *sample)
> +{
> +	u16 channel_count;
> +	u16 sample_format;
> +	u16 sensor_type;
> +	size_t expected_len;
> +	const u8 *payload;
> +
> +	if (!frame || !sample || !frame->payload)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (frame->message_type != OSF_MSG_SENSOR_SAMPLE)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (frame->payload_len < OSF_SENSOR_SAMPLE_BASE_LEN)
> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
> +
> +	payload = frame->payload;
> +	sensor_type = get_unaligned_le16(payload);
> +	channel_count = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 4);
> +	sample_format = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 6);
> +
> +	if (!osf_sensor_type_valid(sensor_type))
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (!channel_count)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (sample_format != OSF_SAMPLE_FORMAT_S32)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (get_unaligned_le32(payload + 12))
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (channel_count > (SIZE_MAX - OSF_SENSOR_SAMPLE_BASE_LEN) / sizeof(s32))
> +		return -EOVERFLOW;
> +
> +	expected_len = OSF_SENSOR_SAMPLE_BASE_LEN + channel_count * sizeof(s32);
> +	if (frame->payload_len != expected_len)
> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
> +
> +	sample->sensor_type = sensor_type;
> +	sample->sensor_index = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 2);
> +	sample->channel_count = channel_count;
> +	sample->sample_format = sample_format;
> +	sample->scale_nano = get_unaligned_le32(payload + 8);
> +	sample->samples = payload + OSF_SENSOR_SAMPLE_BASE_LEN;
See below. Designated initializer would help readability a little here.

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int osf_protocol_sensor_sample_value(const struct osf_sensor_sample *sample,
> +				     unsigned int index, s32 *value)

Given channel count is a u16 and we can't be equal or bigger than it, perhaps
use a u16 for index as well.

> +{
> +	if (!sample || !sample->samples || !value)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (index >= sample->channel_count)
> +		return -ERANGE;
> +
> +	/* Samples are little-endian two's-complement signed values. */
> +	*value = (s32)get_unaligned_le32(sample->samples + index * sizeof(s32));

sizeof(__le32) slightly more appropriate given that is what you are treating it
as.

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int osf_protocol_decode_device_status(const struct osf_frame *frame,
> +				      struct osf_device_status *status)
> +{
> +	const u8 *payload;
> +
> +	if (!frame || !status || !frame->payload)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (frame->message_type != OSF_MSG_DEVICE_STATUS)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (frame->payload_len != OSF_DEVICE_STATUS_LEN)
> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
> +
> +	payload = frame->payload;
> +	if (get_unaligned_le32(payload + 16))
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	status->uptime_s = get_unaligned_le32(payload);
> +	status->status_flags = get_unaligned_le32(payload + 4);
> +	status->error_flags = get_unaligned_le32(payload + 8);
> +	status->dropped_frames = get_unaligned_le32(payload + 12);
Similar to below. I'd use a designated initializer for status as it
is all written in one place.

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

> +
> +int osf_protocol_decode_capability_entry(const struct osf_capability_report *report,
> +					 unsigned int index,
> +					 struct osf_capability_entry *entry)
> +{
> +	u16 sample_format;
> +	u16 sensor_type;
> +	u32 flags;
> +	const u8 *payload;
> +
> +	if (!report || !report->entries || !entry)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (index >= report->capability_count)

Neater to size index to match capability_count.  Not that
important though.

> +		return -ERANGE;
> +
> +	payload = report->entries + index * OSF_CAP_SENSOR_ENTRY_LEN;
> +	sensor_type = get_unaligned_le16(payload);
> +	sample_format = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 6);
> +	flags = get_unaligned_le32(payload + 12);
> +
> +	if (!osf_sensor_type_valid(sensor_type))
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (sample_format != OSF_SAMPLE_FORMAT_S32)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (flags & ~OSF_CAPABILITY_FLAGS_MASK)
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	if (get_unaligned_le32(payload + 16))
> +		return -EPROTO;
> +
> +	entry->sensor_type = sensor_type;
> +	entry->sensor_index = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 2);
> +	entry->channel_count = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 4);
> +	entry->sample_format = sample_format;
> +	entry->scale_nano = get_unaligned_le32(payload + 8);
> +	entry->flags = flags;
neater as designated initializer I think.

	*entry = (struct osf_capability_entry) {
		.sensor_type = sensor_type,
		.sensor_index = get_unaligned_le16(payload + 2),
etc
	};
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-22 16:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-16  7:22 [PATCH RFC v5 0/6] iio: add Open Sensor Fusion IIO driver Jinseob Kim
2026-06-16  7:22 ` [PATCH RFC v5 1/6] dt-bindings: iio: add Open Sensor Fusion device Jinseob Kim
2026-06-16 15:53   ` Conor Dooley
2026-06-16  7:22 ` [PATCH RFC v5 2/6] Documentation: iio: add Open Sensor Fusion driver overview Jinseob Kim
2026-06-22 16:21   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-06-16  7:22 ` [PATCH RFC v5 3/6] iio: osf: add protocol decoding Jinseob Kim
2026-06-16 11:09   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-06-22 16:43   ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2026-06-16  7:22 ` [PATCH RFC v5 4/6] iio: osf: add stream parser Jinseob Kim
2026-06-16 11:16   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-06-16  7:22 ` [PATCH RFC v5 5/6] iio: osf: add UART transport Jinseob Kim
2026-06-16 11:27   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-06-22 16:49   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-06-16  7:22 ` [PATCH RFC v5 6/6] iio: osf: register IIO devices from capabilities Jinseob Kim
2026-06-16 11:32   ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-06-22 17:07   ` Jonathan Cameron

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=20260622174309.35904c86@jic23-huawei \
    --to=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=andy@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
    --cc=kimjinseob88@gmail.com \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.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