Hi Christian, Thanks for porting the driver to the new interface. I have commented on changes in v7-0025-iio-scmi-port-driver-to-the-new-scmi_sensor_proto.patch. Thanks, Jyoti On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:13 AM Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi > > I reposted my series on top of the take3 immutable branch from Jonathan > at: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210316124903.35011-1-cristian.marussi@xxxxxxx/T/#t > > You should have received an email regarding the relevant IIO SCMI patch > > v7-0025-iio-scmi-port-driver-to-the-new-scmi_sensor_proto.patch > > which includes the port of your v7 IIO SCMI driver to the new API, and moved > also the notification registration to the probe phase to simplify it > further. > > On my side I tested with some fake emulated sensors emitting periodic > 100ms SENSOR_UPDATE notifs...and verifying that notifications are still > dispatched and received fine. (values are just fakes) > > If you can have a look, comment and possibly Ack. > > Thanks > > Cristian > > --- > > (debian-arm64)root@debarm64:~# /root/iio_generic_buffer -a -c -1 -g -l 100 -N 0 > iio device number being used is 0 > trigger-less mode selected > Enabling all channels > Enabling: in_accel_x_en > Enabling: in_accel_z_en > Enabling: in_timestamp_en > Enabling: in_accel_y_en > -9465 -9457 -9449 6169807244683640832.000000 > -9464 -9456 -9448 6169807244683640832.000000 > -9463 -9455 -9447 6169807244683640832.000000 > -9462 -9454 -9446 6169807244683640832.000000 > -9461 -9453 -9445 6169807244683640832.000000 > -9460 -9452 -9444 6169807244683640832.000000 > -9459 -9451 -9443 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9458 -9450 -9442 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9457 -9449 -9441 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9456 -9448 -9440 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9455 -9447 -9439 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9454 -9446 -9438 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9453 -9445 -9437 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9452 -9444 -9436 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9451 -9443 -9435 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9450 -9442 -9434 7169807022831960064.000000 > -9449 -9441 -9433 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9448 -9440 -9432 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9447 -9439 -9431 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9446 -9438 -9430 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9445 -9437 -9429 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9444 -9436 -9428 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9443 -9435 -9427 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9442 -9434 -9426 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9441 -9433 -9425 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9440 -9432 -9424 8169806800980279296.000000 > -9439 -9431 -9423 9169807128884412416.000000 > -9438 -9430 -9422 9169807128884412416.000000 > -9437 -9429 -9421 9169807128884412416.000000 > -9436 -9428 -9420 9169807128884412416.000000 > -9435 -9427 -9419 9169807128884412416.000000 > ^CCaught signal 2 > Disabling: in_accel_x_en > Disabling: in_accel_z_en > Disabling: in_timestamp_en > Disabling: in_accel_y_en > > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:47:25AM -0700, Jyoti Bhayana wrote: > > Hi Jonathan, > > > > No worries. Thanks for the update. It looks good now. > > > > Thanks, > > Jyoti > > > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 11:55:39 -0800 > > > Jyoti Bhayana <jbhayana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jonathan, > > > > > > > > I still see the old version 6 in ib-iio-scmi-5.12-rc2-take2 as well. > > > > > > OK. I'm completely confused as to what is going with my local tree. > > > I have the right patch in the history but it didn't end up in the final > > > pushed out version. Fat finger mess-up I guess and too many similarly named > > > branches and the fact I didn't check the final result closely enough. > > > > > > There is now an ib-iio-scmi-5.12-rc2-take3 branch > > > > > > This time it definitely has your patch from the 9th of March with no > > > instances of long long in it. > > > > > > Sorry I messed this one up (again!) > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jyoti > > >
