On 22 July 2015 06:15:27 BST, Andrea Galbusera <gizero@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> >wrote: >> On 15/07/15 19:12, Hartmut Knaack wrote: >>> Andrea Galbusera schrieb am 14.07.2015 um 15:36: >>>> According to the datasheet, the 2 MSBs for parts 3001 and 3201 are >>>> unspecified and should be masked out >>>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> since resolution is already set, better make it more generic by >applying >>> the mask in _read_raw like this: >>> >>> *val = ret & GENMASK(adc->chip_info->resolution - 1, 0); >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Hartmut >> Agreed, that would be cleaner. > >Fine for me! I will respin the patch and resend. My only concern is on >how this will get applied. If I understand correctly my other three >patches in the series will probably get applied before this one. The >2,3,4/4 will add the new part with masking applied in >mcp320x_adc_conversion. Then the new version of this one should move >masking in _read_raw. So, is it fine to rebase the new version of this >on top of the other three and resend as a standalone patch? Otherwise >I can respin the entire series, but this one will still affect other >parts... Please forgive my newbie questions, and let me know the best >approach to follow. Spin it to go on top. Thanks J > >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andrea Galbusera <gizero@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> This was already suggested but for some reason got lost during >review of a >>>> previous patch. See >http://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=140748835509583&w=2 >>>> and following discussion >>>> >>>> drivers/iio/adc/mcp320x.c | 4 ++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/mcp320x.c b/drivers/iio/adc/mcp320x.c >>>> index 8d9c9b9..0673ee7 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/mcp320x.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/mcp320x.c >>>> @@ -114,13 +114,13 @@ static int mcp320x_adc_conversion(struct >mcp320x *adc, u8 channel, >>>> >>>> switch (device_index) { >>>> case mcp3001: >>>> - return (adc->rx_buf[0] << 5 | adc->rx_buf[1] >> 3); >>>> + return ((adc->rx_buf[0] & 0x1f) << 5 | adc->rx_buf[1] >>> 3); >>>> case mcp3002: >>>> case mcp3004: >>>> case mcp3008: >>>> return (adc->rx_buf[0] << 2 | adc->rx_buf[1] >> 6); >>>> case mcp3201: >>>> - return (adc->rx_buf[0] << 7 | adc->rx_buf[1] >> 1); >>>> + return ((adc->rx_buf[0] & 0x1f) << 7 | adc->rx_buf[1] >>> 1); >>>> case mcp3202: >>>> case mcp3204: >>>> case mcp3208: >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" >in >>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
