On Sun, 01 Jan 2023 12:16:28 +0100 Angel Iglesias <ang.iglesiasg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2022-12-30 at 18:22 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 19:23:16 +0100 > > Angel Iglesias <ang.iglesiasg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2022-12-29 at 18:35 +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > > > > Le 26/12/2022 à 15:29, Angel Iglesias a écrit : > > > > > Adds compatibility with the new sensor generation, the BMP580. > > > > > > > > > > The measurement and initialization codepaths are adapted from > > > > > the device datasheet and the repository from manufacturer at > > > > > https://github.com/boschsensortec/BMP5-Sensor-API. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Angel Iglesias > > > > > <ang.iglesiasg-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280.h > > > > > b/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280.h > > > > > index efc31bc84708..27d2abc17d01 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280.h > > > > > +++ b/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280.h > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > +#define BMP580_CHIP_ID 0x50 > > > > > #define BMP380_CHIP_ID 0x50 > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > this is maybe correct (I've not been able to find the datasheet to check > > > > myself), but it looks odd to have the same ID for 2 different chips. > > > > > > Yes, I also couldn't find a datasheet for the BMP580 or a devkit anywhere. > > > I'm > > > developing this using the BMP581, which seems to be a variant almost > > > identical. > > > Something similar happened with the BMP38x; you could find the BMP384 and > > > the > > > BMP388, but the BMP380 was unavailable everywhere, datasheet included. My > > > guess > > > is this is a similar situation. In any case, the datasheet of the BMP581 is > > > available here: > > > https://www.bosch-sensortec.com/media/boschsensortec/downloads/datasheets/bst-bmp581-ds004.pdf > > > > > > Regarding the chip id being the same between generations is weird, but at > > > least > > > the datasheet and the sensor I have uses 0x50 as the chip id. After you > > > mentioned this, I checked back on the reference API repository from Bosch > > > and it > > > has both 0x50 and 0x51 as valid IDs: > > > * > > > https://github.com/boschsensortec/BMP5-Sensor-API/blob/master/bmp5_defs.h#L198 > > > * https://github.com/boschsensortec/BMP5-Sensor-API/blob/master/bmp5.c#L1444 > > https://github.com/boschsensortec/BMP3-Sensor-API/blob/master/bmp3_defs.h > > I was curious on whether we had a wrong value for bmp380, but nope... Same ID. > > > > Huh. As per earlier comment - who wants to moan at Bosch as this is crazy > > situation? > > > > Jonathan > > Well I'm doing this in my free time beacuse I wanted to setup a meteo station > and got annoyed needing to patch-up userspace code for reading pressure and > temperature sensors on a very underpowered ARM device when there is a kernel > subsystem for this kind of things. The rest is history on the mailing list. > I don't think I have any leverage to have Bosch listening to my complaints Sadly I don't have a good contact in Bosch. So all we can do is +CC the contact address. If anyone else has a good channel to point out this silliness please do! Jonathan > > Angel > > > > > > > > > Angel > > > > > > > CJ > > > > > > > > > #define BMP180_CHIP_ID 0x55 > > > > > #define BMP280_CHIP_ID 0x58 > > > > > > > > > >
