Re: [PATCH] iio: document bindings for mounting matrixes

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>]

On 25/08/16 23:04, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
>> Gregor:
>>> So I feel like we should keep away from any temptation to define the coordinates
>>> system too strictly.
>>> I also think of systems composed of multiple hardware parts with sensors
>>> scattered all over them. What would be the right "device/main hardware" reference
>>> frame definition in these cases ?
>>> As this is product specific, I feel like "device/main hardware" reference frame
>>> definition should be left to the "board/main hardware/device..." implementor's
>>> choice.
>>
>> Flexible is good, but I think we should define a base rule for the chips frame
>> of reference and fix up any that disagree (which is nasty ABI breakage :(
>> Trivial choice of either right handed or left handed frame might be all we
>> define in general.  Useful to define consistent frames for device types that
>> are common perhaps as well.  (such as the screen ones Linus has here).
> 
> Admittedly I come from the mobile phone industry.
> 
> So these frames of reference is not cooked up by me, I installed the
> Android app "Sensors test" to test two devices relative the world, so this
> is the frame of reference used by all mobile phones and tablets on the
> planet (I hardly think iPhone deviates).
> 
> I would be happy to write explicitly that for human interaction devices
> with screens that frame of reference should always be assumed, but for
> other uses and device types other frames of reference may apply, would
> you agree?
Absolutely.  The references Gregor gave might also be worth mentioning
as they provide pretty pictures etc ;)

Jonathan
> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>