Re: extending /sys/.../iio:deviceX/in_accelX_power_mode

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Am 01.03.2016 10:53 schrieb Crt Mori:
On 1 March 2016 at 10:47, Martin Kepplinger <martink@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 2016-03-01 um 10:38 schrieb Daniel Baluta:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Martin Kepplinger <martink@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Would it be ok, if adding in_accelX_power_mode to a driver, to extend it
so that in_accel_power_mode_available offers:

low_noise low_power low_power_low_noise normal

if there's a default "normal" mode, plus options to increase or decrease
oversampling / power consumption for my device?

Specifically I'm unsure about "low_power_low_noise" being enough
user-friendly. The chip I work with just happens to offer these 4 modes.
Would you leave out "low_power_low_noise" and go with

low_noise low_power normal

or is it not even desired to add "normal" to the list?

Although strictly not necessary, I would add any new addition to the
Documentation as well.

The problem with this is that is not uniform across sensors. What
chip are you looking at?

For example INV6500 has:
* sleep mode
* standby mode
* etc.

Daniel.


I suspect these modes are something else. I'm looking at the mma8452
driver, and it also has "active" "standby" and "sleep" modes, but I'm
talking about different *power* (oversampling) configurations in
"active" mode, which is what said sysfs file is about.

But yes, it should be potenially uniform across sensors, which is why I
would probably only add "normal" to the list. At least I can imagine
that many devices have an oversampling mode called "normal".

If that is oversampling option then why don't you just use that as a
setup? Power mode does not sound like oversampling to me... Maybe you
should use a sampling_frequency parameter instead?


well, it doesn't affect the sampling frequency. Oversampling is a way chips get
more accurate values and use more power. But it's fine. It comes down to
trying patches and see what happens anyways :)


A simple user interface is important so right now I think the best is to
leave it as it is, and not to add complexity and every possible option
for the user.
--
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
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [X.org]

  Powered by Linux