On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 16:23 +0100, Peter Meerwald wrote: > > > > > + > > > > > + values[i] = data & 0xFF; > > > > > + values[i+1] = data >> 8; > > > > > > > > this is incorrect; it forces the data to be little endian, however, the > > > > endianness (as specified in the driver's .scan_type) is IIO_CPU -- the > > > > code breaks for big-endian CPUs > > > > > > > > since _read_i2c_block_data() can't do endianness conversion (and the chip > > > > does i2c endianness, i.e. little-endian), the .scan_type should become > > > > IIO_LE and above code is correct again but still ugly :) > > > > > > > > bottom line: change .scan_type to IIO_LE > > > > > > > Good point. Changing the endianess to IIO_LE is correct for either kxcjk1013_read_block_data or i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data. > > > Will fix this in the next version. Thanks for catching this! > > > > > I don't think changing to IIO_LE is good idea as when i2c_read_bock.. > > then the scan type will be CPU. So better to fix endianness in this > > function. > > the chip has little-endian data registers; i2c_read_block() just transfers > the data (no endianness conversion), so the data will still be > little-endian You are right. > > p. > ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��(��)��jg��������ݢj����G�������j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥