On Sat, 2024-09-07 at 18:35 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 12:20:46 +0200 > Emil Gedenryd <emil.gedenryd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > TI's opt3002 light sensor shares most properties with the opt3001 > > model, with the exception of supporting a wider spectrum range. > > > > Add support for TI's opt3002 by extending the TI opt3001 driver. > > > > See https://www.ti.com/product/OPT3002 for more information. > Make that a Datasheet tag. > > > Datasheet: https://www.ti.com/product/OPT3002 > > Signed-off-by: Emil Gedenryd <emil.gedenryd@xxxxxxxx> > > Various comments inline. > Thanks, > > Jonathan Thank you for having a look at the patch set. I'll submit a new version that fixes the issues you highlighted in the code and commit messages either later today or tomorrow. Best regards, Emil > > > --- > > drivers/iio/light/Kconfig | 2 +- > > drivers/iio/light/opt3001.c | 199 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > 2 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/Kconfig b/drivers/iio/light/Kconfig > > index b68dcc1fbaca..c35bf962dae6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/light/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/iio/light/Kconfig > > @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ config OPT3001 > > depends on I2C > > help > > If you say Y or M here, you get support for Texas Instruments > > - OPT3001 Ambient Light Sensor. > > + OPT3001 Ambient Light Sensor, OPT3002 Light-to-Digital Sensor. > > > > If built as a dynamically linked module, it will be called > > opt3001. > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/opt3001.c b/drivers/iio/light/opt3001.c > > index 176e54bb48c3..e6098f88dd04 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/light/opt3001.c > > +++ b/drivers/iio/light/opt3001.c > > @@ -70,6 +70,19 @@ > > #define OPT3001_RESULT_READY_SHORT 150 > > #define OPT3001_RESULT_READY_LONG 1000 > > > > +/* The opt3002 doesn't have a device id register, predefine value instead */ > > +#define OPT3002_DEVICE_ID_VALUE 3002 > > Why? Just make the code not care about the value for this > device. Add a flag to the chip info structure to say it doesn't have > one and check that before using it. The device id is used to log the model. Should I not log the model for the opt3002 then or should I have the callback just return 3002? I thought it would be cleaner to have the id value as a defined constant instead of a "magic" number in the code. Is there a preferred way of doing it? > > > > + > > +enum chip_model { > > + OPT3001, > This should not be needed. See below. > > > + OPT3002, > > +}; > > + > > +struct opt300x_chip_info { > > + enum chip_model model; > > + enum iio_chan_type chan_type; > > +}; > > + > > struct opt3001 { > > struct i2c_client *client; > > struct device *dev; > > @@ -79,6 +92,7 @@ struct opt3001 { > > bool result_ready; > > wait_queue_head_t result_ready_queue; > > u16 result; > > + const struct opt300x_chip_info *chip_info; > > > > u32 int_time; > > u32 mode; > > @@ -97,6 +111,16 @@ struct opt3001_scale { > > int val2; > > }; > > > > +static const struct opt300x_chip_info opt3001_chip_info = { > > + .model = OPT3001, > Having a model in a chip_info structure is almost always a sign > of a design that won't scale well to lots of additional devices. > > Get rid of that and instead add all the 'data' that you are looking > up with that model number to this structure so it can be just > referenced without caring which mode it is for. Good point! I'll move as much model-specific code as possible to the struct. > > > + .chan_type = IIO_LIGHT, > > +}; > > + > > +static const struct opt300x_chip_info opt3002_chip_info = { > > + .model = OPT3002, > > + .chan_type = IIO_INTENSITY, > > +}; > > > + > > static int opt3001_find_scale(const struct opt3001 *opt, int val, > > int val2, u8 *exponent) > > { > > int i; > > + const struct opt3001_scale (*scale_arr)[12]; > > > > - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(opt3001_scales); i++) { > > - const struct opt3001_scale *scale = &opt3001_scales[i]; > > + switch (opt->chip_info->model) { > > + case OPT3001: > > + scale_arr = &opt3001_scales; > Put them in chip_info directly, not look them up here. > > > + break; > > + case OPT3002: > > + scale_arr = &opt3002_scales; > > + break; > > + default: > > + dev_err(opt->dev, "scale not configured for chip model\n"); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > > > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(*scale_arr); i++) { > > + const struct opt3001_scale *scale = &(*scale_arr)[i]; > > /* > > - * Combine the integer and micro parts for comparison > > - * purposes. Use milli lux precision to avoid 32-bit integer > > - * overflows. > > + * Compare the integer and micro parts to determine value scale. > > */ > > - if ((val * 1000 + val2 / 1000) <= > > - (scale->val * 1000 + scale->val2 / 1000)) { > > + if (val < scale->val || > > + (val == scale->val && val2 <= scale->val2)) { > > *exponent = i; > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -174,11 +259,20 @@ static int opt3001_find_scale(const struct opt3001 *opt, int val, > > static void opt3001_to_iio_ret(struct opt3001 *opt, u8 exponent, > > u16 mantissa, int *val, int *val2) > > { > > - int lux; > > + int ret; > > > > - lux = 10 * (mantissa << exponent); > > - *val = lux / 1000; > > - *val2 = (lux - (*val * 1000)) * 1000; > > + switch (opt->chip_info->model) { > > + case OPT3001: > > + ret = 10 * (mantissa << exponent); > > + *val = ret / 1000; > > + *val2 = (ret - (*val * 1000)) * 1000; > > + break; > > + case OPT3002: > > + ret = 12 * (mantissa << exponent); > > + *val = ret / 10; > > + *val2 = (ret - (*val * 10)) * 100000; > > As below - constants in the chip_info structure so this becomes > a simple case of using them without needing to know the chip type > in the code. > > > + break; > > + } > > } > > > @@ -497,7 +602,15 @@ static int opt3001_write_event_value(struct iio_dev *iio, > > goto err; > > } > > > > - mantissa = (((val * 1000) + (val2 / 1000)) / 10) >> exponent; > > + switch (opt->chip_info->model) { > > + case OPT3001: > > + mantissa = (((val * 1000) + (val2 / 1000)) / 10) >> exponent; > > Encode the sections of this maths that is different as values in the chip > info structure and use them directly here rather than having a switch statement. > > > + break; > > + case OPT3002: > > + mantissa = (((val * 10) + (val2 / 100000)) / 12) >> exponent; > > + break; > > + } > > + > > value = (exponent << 12) | mantissa; > > > > switch (dir) { > > @@ -607,15 +720,22 @@ static int opt3001_read_id(struct opt3001 *opt) > > manufacturer[0] = ret >> 8; > > manufacturer[1] = ret & 0xff; > > > > - ret = i2c_smbus_read_word_swapped(opt->client, OPT3001_DEVICE_ID); > > - if (ret < 0) { > > - dev_err(opt->dev, "failed to read register %02x\n", > > + switch (opt->chip_info->model) { > > Add a callback for this to the chip_info structure. That will make it > much cleaner to add future devices. > > > + case OPT3001: > > + ret = i2c_smbus_read_word_swapped(opt->client, > > + OPT3001_DEVICE_ID); > > + if (ret == 0) { > > + dev_err(opt->dev, "failed to read register %02x\n", > > OPT3001_DEVICE_ID); > > - return ret; > > + return ret; > > + } > > + device_id = ret; > > + break; > > + case OPT3002: > > + device_id = OPT3002_DEVICE_ID_VALUE; > > + break; > > > @@ -755,6 +877,7 @@ static int opt3001_probe(struct i2c_client *client) > > opt = iio_priv(iio); > > opt->client = client; > > opt->dev = dev; > > + opt->chip_info = device_get_match_data(&client->dev); > > > > mutex_init(&opt->lock); > > init_waitqueue_head(&opt->result_ready_queue); > > @@ -769,10 +892,18 @@ static int opt3001_probe(struct i2c_client *client) > > return ret; > > > > iio->name = client->name; > > - iio->channels = opt3001_channels; > > - iio->num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(opt3001_channels); > > iio->modes = INDIO_DIRECT_MODE; > > iio->info = &opt3001_info; > > + switch (opt->chip_info->model) { > > + case OPT3001: > > + iio->channels = opt3001_channels; > > + iio->num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(opt3001_channels); > Add this to the chip info structure so this can become a simple assignment > rather than having to look up by model. > > > + break; > > + case OPT3002: > > + iio->channels = opt3002_channels; > > + iio->num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(opt3002_channels); > > + break; > > + } > > > > ret = devm_iio_device_register(dev, iio); > > if (ret) { > > @@ -826,13 +957,15 @@ static void opt3001_remove(struct i2c_client *client) > > } > > > > static const struct i2c_device_id opt3001_id[] = { > > - { "opt3001" }, > > + { "opt3001", 0 }, > > + { "opt3002", 1 }, > > { } /* Terminating Entry */ > > }; > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, opt3001_id); > > > > static const struct of_device_id opt3001_of_match[] = { > > - { .compatible = "ti,opt3001" }, > > + { .compatible = "ti,opt3001", .data = &opt3001_chip_info }, > > + { .compatible = "ti,opt3002", .data = &opt3002_chip_info }, > > { } > > }; > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, opt3001_of_match); > > >
