On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 12:23:05PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2024 18:00:09 +1000
> John Watts <contact@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> many thanks for the detailed review (also on the other two patches), much
> appreciated!
No problem!
> I see what you mean, though I actually looked at the number of steps
> mentioned in the first part of the register description. Now
> triple-checking this I came up with this table (generated by a spreadsheet
> to minimise human error):
> voltage decimal binary
> 1600 88 1011000
> 1700 89 1011001
> 1800 90 1011010
> 1900 91 1011011
> 2000 92 1011100
> 2100 93 1011101
> 2200 94 1011110
> 2300 95 1011111
> 2400 96 1100000
> 2500 97 1100001
> 2600 98 1100010
> 2700 99 1100011
> 2800 100 1100100
> 2900 101 1100101
> 3000 102 1100110
> 3100 103 1100111
> 3200 104 1101000
> 3300 105 1101001
> 3400 106 1101010
>
> Which means the final binary value in the datasheet is wrong, as 1101011
> would mean 3.5V.
> Also 1101010 = 106
> -1011000 = 88
> =============
> 0010010 = 18
> and 18 * 100 + 1600 = 3400, right?
>
> This *is* admittedly quite bonkers, especially since the representations
> between the manual and the code are so different, but can you check that
> this makes sense?
I wrote a program in Python that steps through each range and prints its
value, and according to it value 106 is 3.4V. I dumped it at the end of
this email for anyone curious. Your math checks out too.
So the datasheet must be wrong. Maybe it originally supported up to 3.5V
and someone who doesn't know binary updated the sheet.
I think you should add a note saying that the datasheet is wrong, to
show people this isn't a bug and also save time of others trying to
write their own drivers and check their logic. Something like this:
Warning, the datasheet specifies that 3.40V is 107, which is incorrect:
- There are only 107 steps in total, making the highest step value 106
- 1.60V is listed as 1011000 (88 in decimal), with 18 steps after that
- Adding 100mV for each of the 18 steps past 1.60V gives 3.4V
I think this logic convinces me at least. :)
John.
> I discovered some other issue in the original patch (missed declaring the
> range of IRQ acknowledge registers in the MFD part), so I will send a v2 of
> this series soonish.
>
> > For DCDC3 after applying this patch we get:
> >
> > #define AXP717_DCDC3_NUM_VOLTAGES 103
> > static const struct linear_range axp717_dcdc3_ranges[] = {
> > REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(500000, 0, 70, 10000),
> > REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1220000, 71, 102, 20000),
> > };
> >
> > The datasheet marks the maximum value as 1100110: 1.84V, which is 102.
> > So this patch to correct the AXP717_DCDC3_NUM_VOLTAGES is correct here.
>
> I agree ;-) thanks for checking!
>
> Cheers,
> Andre
---
Python program:
reg = 0
value = 500
for x in range(71):
print("%i: %imV" % (reg, value))
value += 10
reg += 1
value = 1220
for x in range(17):
print("%i: %imV" % (reg, value))
value += 20
reg += 1
value = 1600
for x in range(19):
print("%i: %imV" % (reg, value))
value += 100
reg += 1
