On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 09:44:02AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 5/14/19 9:37 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:46:35AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> >> If the SCMI firmware implementation is reporting values in a scale that
> >> is different from the HWMON units, we need to scale up or down the value
> >> according to how far appart they are.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c b/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c
> >> index a80183a488c5..2c7b87edf5aa 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c
> >> @@ -18,6 +18,47 @@ struct scmi_sensors {
> >> const struct scmi_sensor_info **info[hwmon_max];
> >> };
> >>
> >> +static inline u64 __pow10(u8 x)
> >> +{
> >> + u64 r = 1;
> >> +
> >> + while (x--)
> >> + r *= 10;
> >> +
> >> + return r;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static int scmi_hwmon_scale(const struct scmi_sensor_info *sensor, u64 *value)
> >> +{
> >> + s8 scale = sensor->scale;
> >> + u64 f;
> >> +
> >> + switch (sensor->type) {
> >> + case TEMPERATURE_C:
> >> + case VOLTAGE:
> >> + case CURRENT:
> >> + scale += 3;
> >> + break;
> >> + case POWER:
> >> + case ENERGY:
> >> + scale += 6;
> >> + break;
> >> + default:
> >> + break;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >
> > I was applying this and wanted to check if we can add a check for scale=0
> > here and return early here to above the below check and __pow10(0) ?
>
> Doing an early check for scale == 0 sounds like a good idea,good catch!
> Feel free to amend the patch directly when you apply it.
>
Ok with me. Just make it == 0 :-).
Guenter
> >
> > Let me know if you agree. I can fix up. Also I will try to test it on
> > Juno if firmware behaves correctly :)
>
> Great, thanks.
> --
> Florian
