On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 14:19:18 +0200
Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 10:28:26AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 01:05:38 +0200
> > Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Add the coefficients for the IIO standard units and the IIO value
> > > inside the chip_info structure.
> > >
> > > Move the calculations for the IIO unit compatibility from inside the
> > > read_{temp,press,humid}() functions and move them to the general
> > > read_raw() function.
> > >
> > > In this way, all the data for the calculation of the value are
> > > located in the chip_info structure of the respective sensor.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Does this incorporate the fix? I'm a little confused looking at
> > what is visible here, so I'd like Adam to take a look.
> >
> > Btw, you missed cc'ing Adam.
> >
>
> Ah, I only used the output of get_maintainer...
always be careful to sanity check that :)
> ...
>
> > > @@ -518,11 +511,29 @@ static int bmp280_read_raw_impl(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED:
> > > switch (chan->type) {
> > > case IIO_HUMIDITYRELATIVE:
> > > - return data->chip_info->read_humid(data, val, val2);
> > > + ret = data->chip_info->read_humid(data, &chan_value);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + *val = data->chip_info->humid_coeffs[0] * chan_value;
> > > + *val2 = data->chip_info->humid_coeffs[1];
> > > + return data->chip_info->humid_coeffs_type;
> > > case IIO_PRESSURE:
> > > - return data->chip_info->read_press(data, val, val2);
> > > + ret = data->chip_info->read_press(data, &chan_value);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + *val = data->chip_info->press_coeffs[0] * chan_value;
> > > + *val2 = data->chip_info->press_coeffs[1];
> > > + return data->chip_info->press_coeffs_type;
> > > case IIO_TEMP:
> > > - return data->chip_info->read_temp(data, val, val2);
> > > + ret = data->chip_info->read_temp(data, &chan_value);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + *val = data->chip_info->temp_coeffs[0] * (s64)chan_value;
>
> This is the first difference with the previous version where I incorporated
> the typecasting to (s64).
On a 32 bit platform that will then get pushed into a 32 bit int and overflow
I think. Back when IIO got started everything was 32 bit so it didn't make sense
to make these 64 bit or indeed to worry about forcing the size.
Jonathan
