From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
To: Rupesh Majhi <zoone.rupert@gmail.com>
Cc: "Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
"Bill Wendling" <morbo@google.com>,
"David Lechner" <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
"Eddie James" <eajames@linux.ibm.com>,
"Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>,
"Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@kernel.org>,
"Justin Stitt" <justinstitt@google.com>,
"Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
"Nick Desaulniers" <nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com>,
"Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] iio: pressure: dps310: add triggered buffer support
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 12:06:12 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ao1bBFkLXIIgNl49@ashevche-desk.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260824201203.396651-5-zoone.rupert@gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 11:12:01PM +0300, Rupesh Majhi wrote:
> Add a triggered buffer in order to capture continuously on both channels
> instead of one sysfs read at a time.
>
> Raw register value is not useful on its own, pressure has to go through
> the compensation polynomial and needs a temperature reading. Report raw
> in Pa with 1/1000 scale to keep full resolution in the buffer without
> changing what the existing processed attribute reports.
>
> Raw and processed reads return -EBUSY while buffer is on, so does any
> reconfiguration.
...
> +struct dps310_scan {
> + s32 channels[2];
> + aligned_s64 ts;
> +};
Wondering if using macro here would make sense...
...
> static const struct iio_chan_spec dps310_channels[] = {
> {
> .type = IIO_TEMP,
> .info_mask_separate = BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_OVERSAMPLING_RATIO) |
> BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SAMP_FREQ) |
> BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED),
> + .scan_index = DPS310_SCAN_TEMP,
> + .scan_type = {
> + .sign = 's',
> + .realbits = 32,
> + .storagebits = 32,
> + .endianness = IIO_CPU,
> + },
> },
> {
> .type = IIO_PRESSURE,
> + /*
> + * Pressure is only meaningful once the raw register value has
> + * been run through the compensation polynomial in section 4.9.1
> + * of the datasheet, which needs a temperature reading as well.
> + * So what is reported as _raw here is already compensated, in
> + * Pa, and _scale converts it to the kPa the ABI asks for. The
> + * _processed attribute reports the same value and predates
> + * buffer support, so it has to stay.
> + *
> + * Do not copy this pattern into other drivers. A raw attribute
> + * that is not the raw register value is only tolerable here
> + * because the alternative is either losing resolution in the
> + * buffer or breaking existing users of _processed.
> + */
> .info_mask_separate = BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_OVERSAMPLING_RATIO) |
> BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SAMP_FREQ) |
> - BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED),
> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED) |
Leave it untouched, squeeze the new ones above this.
> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) |
> + BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE),
> + .scan_index = DPS310_SCAN_PRESSURE,
> + .scan_type = {
> + .sign = 's',
> + .realbits = 32,
> + .storagebits = 32,
> + .endianness = IIO_CPU,
> + },
> },
> + IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(2),
> };
...
> static int dps310_read_pressure(struct dps310_data *data, int *val, int *val2,
> *val2 = 1000; /* Convert Pa to KPa per IIO ABI */
Side note, at some point makes sense to move from 1000 to KILO.
> return IIO_VAL_FRACTIONAL;
>
> + case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE:
> + /* The raw value is in Pa, the ABI wants kPa */
> + *val = 1;
> + *val2 = 1000;
Ditto.
> + return IIO_VAL_FRACTIONAL;
...
> +static int dps310_fill_scan(struct dps310_data *data,
> + const unsigned long *scan_mask,
> + struct dps310_scan *scan)
> + __must_hold(&data->lock)
> +{
> + int rc;
> + int i = 0;
Why is 'i' signed? Also, move assignment closer to its first user.
> + /*
> + * The pressure compensation needs a temperature reading, so temperature
> + * is sampled even when only the pressure channel is enabled.
> + */
> + rc = dps310_read_temp_raw_locked(data);
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
> +
> + if (test_bit(DPS310_SCAN_TEMP, scan_mask)) {
> + /* Millidegrees Celsius */
> + rc = dps310_calculate_temp(data, &scan->channels[i]);
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
> +
> + i++;
Wouldn't
rc = dps310_calculate_temp(data, &scan->channels[i++]);
work?
> + }
> +
> + if (test_bit(DPS310_SCAN_PRESSURE, scan_mask)) {
> + rc = dps310_read_pres_raw_locked(data);
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
> +
> + /* Pascals, see the comment on the channel definition */
> + rc = dps310_calculate_pressure(data, &scan->channels[i]);
For the consistency's sake
rc = dps310_calculate_pressure(data, &scan->channels[i++]);
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
...
> +static irqreturn_t dps310_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p)
> +{
> + struct iio_poll_func *pf = p;
> + struct iio_dev *iio = pf->indio_dev;
> + struct dps310_data *data = iio_priv(iio);
> + struct dps310_scan scan = { };
> + int rc;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> + rc = dps310_fill_scan(data, iio->active_scan_mask, &scan);
> + mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
Hmm... Is scoped_guard() too bad here?
> + if (rc)
> + goto err;
> + iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts(iio, &scan, sizeof(scan),
> + iio_get_time_ns(iio));
I would go with a single line.
> +err:
> + iio_trigger_notify_done(iio->trig);
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-25 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-24 20:11 [PATCH v6 0/6] iio: pressure: dps310: FIFO and triggered buffer support Rupesh Majhi
2026-08-24 20:11 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] iio: pressure: dps310: fix CFG_REG bit definitions Rupesh Majhi
2026-08-24 20:11 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] iio: pressure: dps310: use a local device pointer in probe Rupesh Majhi
2026-08-24 20:12 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] iio: pressure: dps310: rework the raw read paths Rupesh Majhi
2026-08-25 8:59 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-24 20:12 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] iio: pressure: dps310: add triggered buffer support Rupesh Majhi
2026-08-25 9:06 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2026-08-24 20:12 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] iio: pressure: dps310: add hardware FIFO support Rupesh Majhi
2026-08-25 9:39 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-24 20:12 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] iio: pressure: dps310: check the lock markings with context analysis Rupesh Majhi
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=ao1bBFkLXIIgNl49@ashevche-desk.local \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@intel.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=eajames@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
--cc=zoone.rupert@gmail.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