On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 07:48:12 +0100
Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/1/23 19:17, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Nov 2023 23:09:36 +0100
> > Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/26/23 19:16, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 23:26:23 +0100
> >>> Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The ISL76682 is very basic ALS which only supports ALS or IR mode
> >>>> in four ranges, 1k/4k/16k/64k LUX. There is no IRQ support or any
> >>>> other fancy functionality.
> >>>>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Marek,
> >>>
> >>> One last question + a comment in general. Act on that if you like.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Jonathan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> +static int integration_time_available[] = { 0, ISL76682_INT_TIME_US };
> >>>
> >>> Why have an available attribute for a single value. Is it useful for anything?
> >>
> >> To report it to userspace, iio-sensor-proxy uses that to control the ALS
> >> poll interval .
> >
> > It should use integration_time, not the associated available attribute.
>
> So, what should I do with this feedback ?
>
> I did send the V6 already, so shall I change anything in V7 ?
I'll reply there. Just noticed some other oddities around available.
