On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 10:34:10 +0000 Martin Kepplinger <martink@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Add the mount-matrix optional property to the binding since it's supported > and very useful when using the chip on a board. > > Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martink@xxxxxxxxx> Hi Martin, A question on the example. > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/imu/st,lsm6dsx.yaml | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/imu/st,lsm6dsx.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/imu/st,lsm6dsx.yaml > index b39f5217d8ff..443dce326c5e 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/imu/st,lsm6dsx.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/imu/st,lsm6dsx.yaml > @@ -93,6 +93,9 @@ properties: > wakeup-source: > $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag > > + mount-matrix: > + description: an optional 3x3 mounting rotation matrix > + > required: > - compatible > - reg > @@ -114,6 +117,9 @@ examples: > reg = <0x6b>; > interrupt-parent = <&gpio0>; > interrupts = <0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; > + mount-matrix = "1", "0", "0", > + "0", "1", "0", > + "0", "0", "-1"; That's not a rotation matrix - so it's not a valid example... IIRC it's a rotoinversion (determinant -1 whereas should be 1 for a rotation matrix) If a device is doing this we have a disagreement wrt to whether it is using a left or right handed axis - which is a problem, though one that is tricky to fix without causing people all sorts of problems.. Jonathan > }; > }; > ...
