Hi Jonathan!
Jonathan Cameron writes:
> On 17/01/16 16:13, Harald Geyer wrote:
> > * Unify log messages
> > * Add more DEBUG messages
> >
> > Apparently this driver is working unreliably on some platforms that I can't
> > test. Therefore I want an easy way for bug reporters to provide useful
> > information without making the driver too chatty by default.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Harald Geyer <harald@xxxxxxxxx>
> Applied.
I can't find this patch in any repository (while the other patches of the
series are there). Did I miss a reason this was dropped or is this an
oversightr? Should I resend this patch?
TIA,
Harald
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
> > ---
> > changes since V1:
> > * rebased onto the updated series
> >
> > drivers/iio/humidity/dht11.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/humidity/dht11.c b/drivers/iio/humidity/dht11.c
> > index 96185f8..4992e8c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/humidity/dht11.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/humidity/dht11.c
> > @@ -96,6 +96,24 @@ struct dht11 {
> > struct {s64 ts; int value; } edges[DHT11_EDGES_PER_READ];
> > };
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG
> > +/*
> > + * dht11_edges_print: show the data as actually received by the
> > + * driver.
> > + */
> > +static void dht11_edges_print(struct dht11 *dht11)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + dev_dbg(dht11->dev, "%d edges detected:\n", dht11->num_edges);
> > + for (i = 1; i < dht11->num_edges; ++i) {
> > + dev_dbg(dht11->dev, "%d: %lld ns %s\n", i,
> > + dht11->edges[i].ts - dht11->edges[i - 1].ts,
> > + dht11->edges[i - 1].value ? "high" : "low");
> > + }
> > +}
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG */
> > +
> > static unsigned char dht11_decode_byte(char *bits)
> > {
> > unsigned char ret = 0;
> > @@ -119,8 +137,12 @@ static int dht11_decode(struct dht11 *dht11, int offset)
> > for (i = 0; i < DHT11_BITS_PER_READ; ++i) {
> > t = dht11->edges[offset + 2 * i + 2].ts -
> > dht11->edges[offset + 2 * i + 1].ts;
> > - if (!dht11->edges[offset + 2 * i + 1].value)
> > - return -EIO; /* lost synchronisation */
> > + if (!dht11->edges[offset + 2 * i + 1].value) {
> > + dev_dbg(dht11->dev,
> > + "lost synchronisation at edge %d\n",
> > + offset + 2 * i + 1);
> > + return -EIO;
> > + }
> > bits[i] = t > DHT11_THRESHOLD;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -130,8 +152,10 @@ static int dht11_decode(struct dht11 *dht11, int offset)
> > temp_dec = dht11_decode_byte(&bits[24]);
> > checksum = dht11_decode_byte(&bits[32]);
> >
> > - if (((hum_int + hum_dec + temp_int + temp_dec) & 0xff) != checksum)
> > + if (((hum_int + hum_dec + temp_int + temp_dec) & 0xff) != checksum) {
> > + dev_dbg(dht11->dev, "invalid checksum\n");
> > return -EIO;
> > + }
> >
> > dht11->timestamp = ktime_get_real_ns();
> > if (hum_int < 20) { /* DHT22 */
> > @@ -182,6 +206,7 @@ static int dht11_read_raw(struct iio_dev *iio_dev,
> > mutex_lock(&dht11->lock);
> > if (dht11->timestamp + DHT11_DATA_VALID_TIME < ktime_get_real_ns()) {
> > timeres = ktime_get_resolution_ns();
> > + dev_dbg(dht11->dev, "current timeresolution: %dns\n", timeres);
> > if (timeres > DHT11_MIN_TIMERES) {
> > dev_err(dht11->dev, "timeresolution %dns too low\n",
> > timeres);
> > @@ -219,10 +244,13 @@ static int dht11_read_raw(struct iio_dev *iio_dev,
> >
> > free_irq(dht11->irq, iio_dev);
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG
> > + dht11_edges_print(dht11);
> > +#endif
> > +
> > if (ret == 0 && dht11->num_edges < DHT11_EDGES_PER_READ - 1) {
> > - dev_err(&iio_dev->dev,
> > - "Only %d signal edges detected\n",
> > - dht11->num_edges);
> > + dev_err(dht11->dev, "Only %d signal edges detected\n",
> > + dht11->num_edges);
> > ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> > }
> > if (ret < 0)
> >
>
--
If you want to support my work:
see http://friends.ccbib.org/harald/supporting/
or donate via peercoin to P98LRdhit3gZbHDBe7ta5jtXrMJUms4p7w
or bitcoin 1FUtd8T9jRN1rFz63vZz7s2fDtB6d6A7aS
--
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
