Hi Sricharan,
On 26-Oct-16 3:47 PM, Sricharan wrote:
Hi Ramakrishna,
[snip..]
+ u32 i = 0;
+
+ if (!pts)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ /* Check if table is descending or ascending */
+ if (tablesize > 1) {
+ if (pts[0].x < pts[1].x)
+ descending = 0;
+ }
+
+ while (i < tablesize) {
+ if ((descending == 1) && (pts[i].x < input)) {
Just if (descending) instead of (descending == 1) and so on for the below as well
Will change in next patch.
+ /* table entry is less than measured*/
+ /* value and table is descending, stop */
+ break;
+ } else if ((descending == 0) &&
+ (pts[i].x > input)) {
+ /* table entry is greater than measured*/
+ /*value and table is ascending, stop */
+ break;
+ }
+ i++;
+ }
+
+ if (i == 0) {
+ *output = pts[0].y;
+ } else if (i == tablesize) {
+ *output = pts[tablesize - 1].y;
+ } else {
+ /* result is between search_index and search_index-1 */
+ /* interpolate linearly */
+ *output = (((s32)((pts[i].y - pts[i - 1].y) *
+ (input - pts[i - 1].x)) /
+ (pts[i].x - pts[i - 1].x)) +
+ pts[i - 1].y);
+ }
hmm, so for descending, input - pts[i -1].x is negative and
we are adding that to pts[i-1].y, is that correct ?
The formula used is to interpolate between two points using linear
interpolation.
Right, agree. my question can be ignored.
[snip..]
#define VADC_CHAN_TEMP(_dname, _pre) \
- VADC_CHAN(_dname, IIO_TEMP, BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED), _pre) \
+ VADC_CHAN(_dname, IIO_TEMP, \
+ BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) | BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED), \
+ _pre) \
#define VADC_CHAN_VOLT(_dname, _pre) \
- VADC_CHAN(_dname, IIO_VOLTAGE, \
- BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) | BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE), \
+ VADC_CHAN(_dname, IIO_VOLTAGE, \
+ BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) | BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED),\
_pre) \
For this and the below changes to VADC_CHAN_VOLT to TEMP, why is that done ?
Now both macros are setting the same flags.
For Voltage channels IIO_VOLTAGE is needed where as for Temperature
channels IIO_TEMP is needed.
/*
@@ -637,12 +811,11 @@ struct vadc_channels {
VADC_CHAN_TEMP(DIE_TEMP, 0)
VADC_CHAN_VOLT(REF_625MV, 0)
VADC_CHAN_VOLT(REF_1250MV, 0)
- VADC_CHAN_VOLT(CHG_TEMP, 0)
+ VADC_CHAN_TEMP(CHG_TEMP, 0)
VADC_CHAN_VOLT(SPARE1, 0)
VADC_CHAN_VOLT(SPARE2, 0)
VADC_CHAN_VOLT(GND_REF, 0)
VADC_CHAN_VOLT(VDD_VADC, 0)
-
And also looks like the deletion of these and below
new lines are unnecessary ?
Agree, Will retain these new lines in next patch V2.
Regards,
Sricharan
Thanks,
Ramakrishna
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
