On 27.08.19 22:08, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:26:35 +0200
> Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Get rid of invalid sensitivity value for LSM9DS1 gyro sensor
>>
>> Fixes: 687a60feb9c6 ("iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: add support for accel/gyro unit of lsm9ds1")
>> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> The zero degree scale is certainly odd otherwise, so good to tidy
> this up.
>
> Applied to the togreg branch of iio.git.
>
Hi Jon,
you have applied this too quickly. I've left that zero value in there
for a reason, see below:
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
>> ---
>> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 17 +++++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>> index fd152fff0a8c..c85c8be3a024 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>> @@ -151,10 +151,9 @@ static const struct st_lsm6dsx_settings st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[] = {
>> .addr = 0x10,
>> .mask = GENMASK(4, 3),
>> },
>> - .fs_avl[0] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(245), 0x0 },
>> - .fs_avl[1] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(500), 0x1 },
>> - .fs_avl[2] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(0), 0x2 },
>> - .fs_avl[3] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(2000), 0x3 },
>> + .fs_avl[0] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(245), 0x0 },
>> + .fs_avl[1] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(500), 0x1 },
>> + .fs_avl[2] = { IIO_DEGREE_TO_RAD(2000), 0x3 },
>> },
>> },
>> },
>> @@ -1196,13 +1195,19 @@ static ssize_t st_lsm6dsx_sysfs_scale_avail(struct device *dev,
>> char *buf)
>> {
>> struct st_lsm6dsx_sensor *sensor = iio_priv(dev_get_drvdata(dev));
>> + const struct st_lsm6dsx_fs_table_entry *fs_table;
>> enum st_lsm6dsx_sensor_id id = sensor->id;
>> struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw = sensor->hw;
>> int i, len = 0;
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_FS_LIST_SIZE; i++)
>> + fs_table = &hw->settings->fs_table[id];
>> + for (i = 0; i < ST_LSM6DSX_FS_LIST_SIZE; i++) {
>> + if (!fs_table->fs_avl[i].gain)
>> + break;
You Ooops here and it's pretty obvious! You don't have
ST_LSM6DSX_FS_LIST_SIZE number of elements in the array anymore, but you
try to access it (the 4th).
I suggest reverting this (if not able to delete it entirely) and start
over in case this "invalid" value thing hurts and needs to get fixed.
I any case, there _is_ something we should do because it's not too
obvious what constraints the st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings struct
definition has. It should be mostly clear when looking at the header but
a few inline comments might help.
thanks,
martin
>> +
>> len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "0.%06u ",
>> - hw->settings->fs_table[id].fs_avl[i].gain);
>> + fs_table->fs_avl[i].gain);
>> + }
>> buf[len - 1] = '\n';
>>
>> return len;
>
