From: Andriy Tryshnivskyy <andriy.tryshnivskyy@opensynergy.com>
To: Jyoti Bhayana <jbhayana@google.com>,
Vasyl Vavrychuk <vasyl.vavrychuk@opensynergy.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] iio/scmi: Add reading "raw" attribute.
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 14:32:27 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <93323bab-c000-4a2b-ecad-9f3f6dc72c69@opensynergy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+=V6c10xE-1uUzGWusBiGVMV2Fwy93dGGHA9FH0PC4tYggVUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Jyoti and Vasyl,
Thanks for your review.
I will provide new patch version soon.
Thanks,
Andriy
On 06.10.21 03:16, Jyoti Bhayana wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization.
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
>
>
> Hi Vasyl,
>
> Regarding below question, yes reading raw attribute should be blocked
> if buffer is enabled for that sensor.
>
>> 1. Should we block reading raw attribute and IIO buffer enabled, for for
>> SCMI sensor it can coexist?
>
> PLease see https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/iio/imu/inv_mpu6050/inv_mpu_core.c#L667
> as well. It has
>
> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
> ret = iio_device_claim_direct_mode(indio_dev);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> mutex_lock(&st->lock);
> ret = inv_mpu6050_read_channel_data(indio_dev, chan, val);
> mutex_unlock(&st->lock);
> iio_device_release_direct_mode(indio_dev);
> return ret;
>
> Regarding the question below, the answer is yes.
>
>> 2. Should we wrap reading raw attribute implementation in iio_dev->mlock
>> mutex?
>
> Thanks, Jyoti
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 5:52 AM Vasyl Vavrychuk
> <vasyl.vavrychuk@opensynergy.com> wrote:
>> Hi, Jyoti,
>>
>>> In the code below, why is the logic of enabling and disabling the
>>> sensor in this function? Generally the function to read the sensor
>>> value is just used for the code to read the sensor values ? and not
>>> enable/disable the sensor
>> But to read sensor value we have to enable it first. Other way to enable
>> sensor we found is, for example:
>>
>> echo 1 > /sys/bus/iio/devices/.../scan_elements/in_anglvel_x_en
>>
>> But, this command is related to IIO buffers use.
>>
>> Other sensors drivers enable/disable sensor in read raw too, for
>> example, drivers/iio/accel/kxcjk-1013.c has:
>>
>> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
>> mutex_lock(&data->mutex);
>> if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev))
>> ret = -EBUSY;
>> else {
>> ret = kxcjk1013_set_power_state(data, true);
>> ... reading ...
>> ret = kxcjk1013_set_power_state(data, false);
>> }
>> mutex_unlock(&data->mutex);
>>
>> But, after looking on this code I have some questions:
>>
>> 1. Should we block reading raw attribute and IIO buffer enabled, for for
>> SCMI sensor it can coexist?
>> 2. Should we wrap reading raw attribute implementation in iio_dev->mlock
>> mutex?
>>
>>>> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
>>>> + sensor_config = FIELD_PREP(SCMI_SENS_CFG_SENSOR_ENABLED_MASK,
>>>> + SCMI_SENS_CFG_SENSOR_ENABLE);
>>>> + err = sensor->sensor_ops->config_set(
>>>> + sensor->ph, sensor->sensor_info->id, sensor_config);
>>>> + if (err) {
>>>> + dev_err(&iio_dev->dev,
>>>> + "Error in enabling sensor %s err %d",
>>>> + sensor->sensor_info->name, err);
>>>> + return err;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + err = sensor->sensor_ops->reading_get_timestamped(
>>>> + sensor->ph, sensor->sensor_info->id,
>>>> + sensor->sensor_info->num_axis, readings);
>>>> + if (err) {
>>>> + dev_err(&iio_dev->dev,
>>>> + "Error in reading raw attribute for sensor %s err %d",
>>>> + sensor->sensor_info->name, err);
>>>> + return err;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + sensor_config = FIELD_PREP(SCMI_SENS_CFG_SENSOR_ENABLED_MASK,
>>>> + SCMI_SENS_CFG_SENSOR_DISABLE);
>>>> + err = sensor->sensor_ops->config_set(
>>>> + sensor->ph, sensor->sensor_info->id, sensor_config);
>>>> + if (err) {
>>>> + dev_err(&iio_dev->dev,
>>>> + "Error in enabling sensor %s err %d",
>>>> + sensor->sensor_info->name, err);
>>>> + return err;
>>>> + }
>>>> + /* Check if raw value fits 32 bits */
>>>> + if (readings[ch->scan_index].value < INT_MIN ||
>>>> + readings[ch->scan_index].value > INT_MAX)
>>>> + return -ERANGE;
>>>> + /* Use 32-bit value, since practically there is no need in 64 bits */
>>>> + *val = (int)readings[ch->scan_index].value;
>>>>
>>>> + return IIO_VAL_INT;
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-08 11:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-28 16:19 [PATCH v3 0/1] iio/scmi: Add reading "raw" attribute Andriy Tryshnivskyy
2021-09-28 16:19 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Andriy Tryshnivskyy
2021-09-30 16:40 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] " Jonathan Cameron
2021-10-04 23:51 ` Jyoti Bhayana
2021-10-05 12:51 ` Vasyl Vavrychuk
2021-10-06 0:16 ` Jyoti Bhayana
2021-10-08 11:32 ` Andriy Tryshnivskyy [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=93323bab-c000-4a2b-ecad-9f3f6dc72c69@opensynergy.com \
--to=andriy.tryshnivskyy@opensynergy.com \
--cc=jbhayana@google.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vasyl.vavrychuk@opensynergy.com \
/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