From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([212.18.0.9]:54273 "EHLO mail-out.m-online.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754221AbcAIR16 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jan 2016 12:27:58 -0500 From: Marek Vasut To: Jonathan Cameron Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: light: acpi-als: Report data as processed rather than raw Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 18:27:50 +0100 Cc: Gabriele Mazzotta , knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net, marxin.liska@gmail.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1452180105-9584-1-git-send-email-gabriele.mzt@gmail.com> <569135DC.2090400@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <569135DC.2090400@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <201601091827.50571.marex@denx.de> Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On Saturday, January 09, 2016 at 05:31:24 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 07/01/16 15:21, Gabriele Mazzotta wrote: > > As per the ACPI specification (Revision 5.0) [1], the data coming > > from the sensor represent the ambient light illuminance reading > > expressed in lux. Use IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED instead of > > IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW to signify that the data are pre-processed. > > > > [1] http://www.acpi.info/DOWNLOADS/ACPIspec50.pdf > > > > Signed-off-by: Gabriele Mazzotta > > Hm. Whilst it's a fix in a sense, the original didn't really 'break' > the ABI so I worry a little that this change may break others. > Irritating as it is, perhaps we should keep the _RAW and add _PROCESSED > (which will then be exactly the same value). > We'll also then need a comment in the code, that leaving the _RAW > elements was for ABI compatibility. > > What do others think? I'm not an IIO guru, but this does sound sensible. Do you know if any userland code which actually uses the ACPI ALS already ? Best regards, Marek Vasut